1Checklist (and a short version for the impatient): 2 3 Commits: 4 5 - make commits of logical units 6 - check for unnecessary whitespace with "git diff --check" 7 before committing 8 - do not check in commented out code or unneeded files 9 - the first line of the commit message should be a short 10 description (50 characters is the soft limit, see DISCUSSION 11 in git-commit(1)), and should skip the full stop 12 - it is also conventional in most cases to prefix the 13 first line with "area: " where the area is a filename 14 or identifier for the general area of the code being 15 modified, e.g. 16 . archive: ustar header checksum is computed unsigned 17 . git-cherry-pick.txt: clarify the use of revision range notation 18 (if in doubt which identifier to use, run "git log --no-merges" 19 on the files you are modifying to see the current conventions) 20 - the body should provide a meaningful commit message, which: 21 . explains the problem the change tries to solve, iow, what 22 is wrong with the current code without the change. 23 . justifies the way the change solves the problem, iow, why 24 the result with the change is better. 25 . alternate solutions considered but discarded, if any. 26 - describe changes in imperative mood, e.g. "make xyzzy do frotz" 27 instead of "[This patch] makes xyzzy do frotz" or "[I] changed 28 xyzzy to do frotz", as if you are giving orders to the codebase 29 to change its behaviour. 30 - try to make sure your explanation can be understood without 31 external resources. Instead of giving a URL to a mailing list 32 archive, summarize the relevant points of the discussion. 33 - add a "Signed-off-by: Your Name <you@example.com>" line to the 34 commit message (or just use the option "-s" when committing) 35 to confirm that you agree to the Developer's Certificate of Origin 36 - make sure that you have tests for the bug you are fixing 37 - make sure that the test suite passes after your commit 38 39 Patch: 40 41 - use "git format-patch -M" to create the patch 42 - do not PGP sign your patch 43 - do not attach your patch, but read in the mail 44 body, unless you cannot teach your mailer to 45 leave the formatting of the patch alone. 46 - be careful doing cut & paste into your mailer, not to 47 corrupt whitespaces. 48 - provide additional information (which is unsuitable for 49 the commit message) between the "---" and the diffstat 50 - if you change, add, or remove a command line option or 51 make some other user interface change, the associated 52 documentation should be updated as well. 53 - if your name is not writable in ASCII, make sure that 54 you send off a message in the correct encoding. 55 - send the patch to the list (git@vger.kernel.org) and the 56 maintainer (gitster@pobox.com) if (and only if) the patch 57 is ready for inclusion. If you use git-send-email(1), 58 please test it first by sending email to yourself. 59 - see below for instructions specific to your mailer 60 61Long version: 62 63I started reading over the SubmittingPatches document for Linux 64kernel, primarily because I wanted to have a document similar to 65it for the core GIT to make sure people understand what they are 66doing when they write "Signed-off-by" line. 67 68But the patch submission requirements are a lot more relaxed 69here on the technical/contents front, because the core GIT is 70thousand times smaller ;-). So here is only the relevant bits. 71 72(0) Decide what to base your work on. 73 74In general, always base your work on the oldest branch that your 75change is relevant to. 76 77 - A bugfix should be based on 'maint' in general. If the bug is not 78 present in 'maint', base it on 'master'. For a bug that's not yet 79 in 'master', find the topic that introduces the regression, and 80 base your work on the tip of the topic. 81 82 - A new feature should be based on 'master' in general. If the new 83 feature depends on a topic that is in 'pu', but not in 'master', 84 base your work on the tip of that topic. 85 86 - Corrections and enhancements to a topic not yet in 'master' should 87 be based on the tip of that topic. If the topic has not been merged 88 to 'next', it's alright to add a note to squash minor corrections 89 into the series. 90 91 - In the exceptional case that a new feature depends on several topics 92 not in 'master', start working on 'next' or 'pu' privately and send 93 out patches for discussion. Before the final merge, you may have to 94 wait until some of the dependent topics graduate to 'master', and 95 rebase your work. 96 97To find the tip of a topic branch, run "git log --first-parent 98master..pu" and look for the merge commit. The second parent of this 99commit is the tip of the topic branch. 100 101(1) Make separate commits for logically separate changes. 102 103Unless your patch is really trivial, you should not be sending 104out a patch that was generated between your working tree and 105your commit head. Instead, always make a commit with complete 106commit message and generate a series of patches from your 107repository. It is a good discipline. 108 109Give an explanation for the change(s) that is detailed enough so 110that people can judge if it is good thing to do, without reading 111the actual patch text to determine how well the code does what 112the explanation promises to do. 113 114If your description starts to get too long, that's a sign that you 115probably need to split up your commit to finer grained pieces. 116That being said, patches which plainly describe the things that 117help reviewers check the patch, and future maintainers understand 118the code, are the most beautiful patches. Descriptions that summarise 119the point in the subject well, and describe the motivation for the 120change, the approach taken by the change, and if relevant how this 121differs substantially from the prior version, are all good things 122to have. 123 124Oh, another thing. I am picky about whitespaces. Make sure your 125changes do not trigger errors with the sample pre-commit hook shipped 126in templates/hooks--pre-commit. To help ensure this does not happen, 127run git diff --check on your changes before you commit. 128 129 130(2) Generate your patch using git tools out of your commits. 131 132git based diff tools generate unidiff which is the preferred format. 133 134You do not have to be afraid to use -M option to "git diff" or 135"git format-patch", if your patch involves file renames. The 136receiving end can handle them just fine. 137 138Please make sure your patch does not include any extra files 139which do not belong in a patch submission. Make sure to review 140your patch after generating it, to ensure accuracy. Before 141sending out, please make sure it cleanly applies to the "master" 142branch head. If you are preparing a work based on "next" branch, 143that is fine, but please mark it as such. 144 145 146(3) Sending your patches. 147 148People on the git mailing list need to be able to read and 149comment on the changes you are submitting. It is important for 150a developer to be able to "quote" your changes, using standard 151e-mail tools, so that they may comment on specific portions of 152your code. For this reason, all patches should be submitted 153"inline". WARNING: Be wary of your MUAs word-wrap 154corrupting your patch. Do not cut-n-paste your patch; you can 155lose tabs that way if you are not careful. 156 157It is a common convention to prefix your subject line with 158[PATCH]. This lets people easily distinguish patches from other 159e-mail discussions. Use of additional markers after PATCH and 160the closing bracket to mark the nature of the patch is also 161encouraged. E.g. [PATCH/RFC] is often used when the patch is 162not ready to be applied but it is for discussion, [PATCH v2], 163[PATCH v3] etc. are often seen when you are sending an update to 164what you have previously sent. 165 166"git format-patch" command follows the best current practice to 167format the body of an e-mail message. At the beginning of the 168patch should come your commit message, ending with the 169Signed-off-by: lines, and a line that consists of three dashes, 170followed by the diffstat information and the patch itself. If 171you are forwarding a patch from somebody else, optionally, at 172the beginning of the e-mail message just before the commit 173message starts, you can put a "From: " line to name that person. 174 175You often want to add additional explanation about the patch, 176other than the commit message itself. Place such "cover letter" 177material between the three dash lines and the diffstat. 178 179Do not attach the patch as a MIME attachment, compressed or not. 180Do not let your e-mail client send quoted-printable. Do not let 181your e-mail client send format=flowed which would destroy 182whitespaces in your patches. Many 183popular e-mail applications will not always transmit a MIME 184attachment as plain text, making it impossible to comment on 185your code. A MIME attachment also takes a bit more time to 186process. This does not decrease the likelihood of your 187MIME-attached change being accepted, but it makes it more likely 188that it will be postponed. 189 190Exception: If your mailer is mangling patches then someone may ask 191you to re-send them using MIME, that is OK. 192 193Do not PGP sign your patch, at least for now. Most likely, your 194maintainer or other people on the list would not have your PGP 195key and would not bother obtaining it anyway. Your patch is not 196judged by who you are; a good patch from an unknown origin has a 197far better chance of being accepted than a patch from a known, 198respected origin that is done poorly or does incorrect things. 199 200If you really really really really want to do a PGP signed 201patch, format it as "multipart/signed", not a text/plain message 202that starts with '-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----'. That is 203not a text/plain, it's something else. 204 205Unless your patch is a very trivial and an obviously correct one, 206first send it with "To:" set to the mailing list, with "cc:" listing 207people who are involved in the area you are touching (the output from 208"git blame $path" and "git shortlog --no-merges $path" would help to 209identify them), to solicit comments and reviews. After the list 210reached a consensus that it is a good idea to apply the patch, re-send 211it with "To:" set to the maintainer and optionally "cc:" the list for 212inclusion. Do not forget to add trailers such as "Acked-by:", 213"Reviewed-by:" and "Tested-by:" after your "Signed-off-by:" line as 214necessary. 215 216 217(4) Sign your work 218 219To improve tracking of who did what, we've borrowed the 220"sign-off" procedure from the Linux kernel project on patches 221that are being emailed around. Although core GIT is a lot 222smaller project it is a good discipline to follow it. 223 224The sign-off is a simple line at the end of the explanation for 225the patch, which certifies that you wrote it or otherwise have 226the right to pass it on as a open-source patch. The rules are 227pretty simple: if you can certify the below: 228 229 Developer's Certificate of Origin 1.1 230 231 By making a contribution to this project, I certify that: 232 233 (a) The contribution was created in whole or in part by me and I 234 have the right to submit it under the open source license 235 indicated in the file; or 236 237 (b) The contribution is based upon previous work that, to the best 238 of my knowledge, is covered under an appropriate open source 239 license and I have the right under that license to submit that 240 work with modifications, whether created in whole or in part 241 by me, under the same open source license (unless I am 242 permitted to submit under a different license), as indicated 243 in the file; or 244 245 (c) The contribution was provided directly to me by some other 246 person who certified (a), (b) or (c) and I have not modified 247 it. 248 249 (d) I understand and agree that this project and the contribution 250 are public and that a record of the contribution (including all 251 personal information I submit with it, including my sign-off) is 252 maintained indefinitely and may be redistributed consistent with 253 this project or the open source license(s) involved. 254 255then you just add a line saying 256 257 Signed-off-by: Random J Developer <random@developer.example.org> 258 259This line can be automatically added by git if you run the git-commit 260command with the -s option. 261 262Notice that you can place your own Signed-off-by: line when 263forwarding somebody else's patch with the above rules for 264D-C-O. Indeed you are encouraged to do so. Do not forget to 265place an in-body "From: " line at the beginning to properly attribute 266the change to its true author (see (2) above). 267 268Also notice that a real name is used in the Signed-off-by: line. Please 269don't hide your real name. 270 271If you like, you can put extra tags at the end: 272 2731. "Reported-by:" is used to credit someone who found the bug that 274 the patch attempts to fix. 2752. "Acked-by:" says that the person who is more familiar with the area 276 the patch attempts to modify liked the patch. 2773. "Reviewed-by:", unlike the other tags, can only be offered by the 278 reviewer and means that she is completely satisfied that the patch 279 is ready for application. It is usually offered only after a 280 detailed review. 2814. "Tested-by:" is used to indicate that the person applied the patch 282 and found it to have the desired effect. 283 284You can also create your own tag or use one that's in common usage 285such as "Thanks-to:", "Based-on-patch-by:", or "Mentored-by:". 286 287------------------------------------------------ 288An ideal patch flow 289 290Here is an ideal patch flow for this project the current maintainer 291suggests to the contributors: 292 293 (0) You come up with an itch. You code it up. 294 295 (1) Send it to the list and cc people who may need to know about 296 the change. 297 298 The people who may need to know are the ones whose code you 299 are butchering. These people happen to be the ones who are 300 most likely to be knowledgeable enough to help you, but 301 they have no obligation to help you (i.e. you ask for help, 302 don't demand). "git log -p -- $area_you_are_modifying" would 303 help you find out who they are. 304 305 (2) You get comments and suggestions for improvements. You may 306 even get them in a "on top of your change" patch form. 307 308 (3) Polish, refine, and re-send to the list and the people who 309 spend their time to improve your patch. Go back to step (2). 310 311 (4) The list forms consensus that the last round of your patch is 312 good. Send it to the list and cc the maintainer. 313 314 (5) A topic branch is created with the patch and is merged to 'next', 315 and cooked further and eventually graduates to 'master'. 316 317In any time between the (2)-(3) cycle, the maintainer may pick it up 318from the list and queue it to 'pu', in order to make it easier for 319people play with it without having to pick up and apply the patch to 320their trees themselves. 321 322------------------------------------------------ 323Know the status of your patch after submission 324 325* You can use Git itself to find out when your patch is merged in 326 master. 'git pull --rebase' will automatically skip already-applied 327 patches, and will let you know. This works only if you rebase on top 328 of the branch in which your patch has been merged (i.e. it will not 329 tell you if your patch is merged in pu if you rebase on top of 330 master). 331 332* Read the git mailing list, the maintainer regularly posts messages 333 entitled "What's cooking in git.git" and "What's in git.git" giving 334 the status of various proposed changes. 335 336------------------------------------------------ 337MUA specific hints 338 339Some of patches I receive or pick up from the list share common 340patterns of breakage. Please make sure your MUA is set up 341properly not to corrupt whitespaces. 342 343See the DISCUSSION section of git-format-patch(1) for hints on 344checking your patch by mailing it to yourself and applying with 345git-am(1). 346 347While you are at it, check the resulting commit log message from 348a trial run of applying the patch. If what is in the resulting 349commit is not exactly what you would want to see, it is very 350likely that your maintainer would end up hand editing the log 351message when he applies your patch. Things like "Hi, this is my 352first patch.\n", if you really want to put in the patch e-mail, 353should come after the three-dash line that signals the end of the 354commit message. 355 356 357Pine 358---- 359 360(Johannes Schindelin) 361 362I don't know how many people still use pine, but for those poor 363souls it may be good to mention that the quell-flowed-text is 364needed for recent versions. 365 366... the "no-strip-whitespace-before-send" option, too. AFAIK it 367was introduced in 4.60. 368 369(Linus Torvalds) 370 371And 4.58 needs at least this. 372 373--- 374diff-tree 8326dd8350be64ac7fc805f6563a1d61ad10d32c (from e886a61f76edf5410573e92e38ce22974f9c40f1) 375Author: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@g5.osdl.org> 376Date: Mon Aug 15 17:23:51 2005 -0700 377 378 Fix pine whitespace-corruption bug 379 380 There's no excuse for unconditionally removing whitespace from 381 the pico buffers on close. 382 383diff --git a/pico/pico.c b/pico/pico.c 384--- a/pico/pico.c 385+++ b/pico/pico.c 386@@ -219,7 +219,9 @@ PICO *pm; 387 switch(pico_all_done){ /* prepare for/handle final events */ 388 case COMP_EXIT : /* already confirmed */ 389 packheader(); 390+#if 0 391 stripwhitespace(); 392+#endif 393 c |= COMP_EXIT; 394 break; 395 396 397(Daniel Barkalow) 398 399> A patch to SubmittingPatches, MUA specific help section for 400> users of Pine 4.63 would be very much appreciated. 401 402Ah, it looks like a recent version changed the default behavior to do the 403right thing, and inverted the sense of the configuration option. (Either 404that or Gentoo did it.) So you need to set the 405"no-strip-whitespace-before-send" option, unless the option you have is 406"strip-whitespace-before-send", in which case you should avoid checking 407it. 408 409 410Thunderbird, KMail, GMail 411------------------------- 412 413See the MUA-SPECIFIC HINTS section of git-format-patch(1). 414 415Gnus 416---- 417 418'|' in the *Summary* buffer can be used to pipe the current 419message to an external program, and this is a handy way to drive 420"git am". However, if the message is MIME encoded, what is 421piped into the program is the representation you see in your 422*Article* buffer after unwrapping MIME. This is often not what 423you would want for two reasons. It tends to screw up non ASCII 424characters (most notably in people's names), and also 425whitespaces (fatal in patches). Running 'C-u g' to display the 426message in raw form before using '|' to run the pipe can work 427this problem around.