[Mesa-dev] [PATCH v2 1/2] mesa: Add KBL PCI IDs and platform information.

Emil Velikov emil.l.velikov at gmail.com
Mon Dec 7 10:11:26 PST 2015

On 20 November 2015 at 18:47, Sarah Sharp <sarah.a.sharp at linux.intel.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 02:18:56PM +0000, Emil Velikov wrote:
>> On 18 November 2015 at 21:59, Ilia Mirkin <imirkin at alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>> > On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 4:54 PM, Sarah Sharp
>> > <sarah.a.sharp at linux.intel.com> wrote:
>> >>> There's not really a consensus I guess, but most people do leave the version
>> >>> information in the final commit message.
>> >>
>> >> I personally feel like that's leaving boredom doodles on a final
>> >> architectural drawing. If people want to know the back-and-forth
>> >> history, the mailing list archive will always be there. So, no, I don't
>> >> really want to leave version info in the commit message.
>> >
>> > FWIW I wholeheartedly agree with this line of reasoning. I never put
>> > the version info into my commits either, and find it
>> > confusing/misleading when others do. I want to know the final state of
>> > things when looking at the commit 1 year from now, not the 20-step
>> > process and all the wrong turns to get there.
>> >
>> The other side of the coin:
>>  - One might not have access to the discussion - ISP/ML archive is
>> down. discussion was offline or no longer available (10+ years ago),
>> etc.
>>  - Revision history is immediately available, rather than going back
>> and forth between git/browser/email client.
>>  - We can easily ignore the revision history hunk
>>  - Hitting more than v3 is a clear sign something fishy (most likely
>> lack of experience of said author), which in itself is useful.
> Or perfectionist maintainers, or a controversial change that touches
> many subsystems.
Precisely - it also allows others to be aware of these details
(alongside Ben's "name and shame" & other comments) from the get go.

> It's not uncommon for a kernel patchset to make it up
> to v8, even if the idea is sound. Glad to hear that mesa is less picky
> than the kernel anyway. :)
Imho graphics in general tends to be like that. After all, we want our
screens to light up and see the lovely glxgears spinning :-P

I might have high-jacked the thread. Sorry about that.


More information about the mesa-dev mailing list