From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F14E39666D
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 25 Jan 2023 09:59:51 +0100 (CET)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id C44EAC421
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 25 Jan 2023 09:59:21 +0100 (CET)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com
 [94.136.29.106])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 25 Jan 2023 09:59:21 +0100 (CET)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
 by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 044A44606B
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 25 Jan 2023 09:59:21 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <a5e3822d-549b-7b15-547b-58ff8f876554@proxmox.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2023 09:59:20 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:110.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/110.0
Content-Language: de-AT, en-GB
To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>,
 Wolfgang Bumiller <w.bumiller@proxmox.com>,
 Moayad Almalat <m.almalat@proxmox.com>
References: <20230123095235.156177-1-m.almalat@proxmox.com>
 <20230125083854.g5o2itt5etcgig37@casey.proxmox.com>
From: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <20230125083854.g5o2itt5etcgig37@casey.proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 0.528 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
 BAYES_00                 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
 KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment
 NICE_REPLY_A           -1.148 Looks like a legit reply (A)
 SPF_HELO_NONE           0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
 SPF_PASS               -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
Subject: Re: [pve-devel] applied: [PATCH v2 manager] fix #3037: include the
 split_list to shell_qoute
X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2023 08:59:52 -0000

Am 25/01/2023 um 09:38 schrieb Wolfgang Bumiller:
> applied
> 
> Though the whole commit message is actually the change log to v1 of the
> patch and should not have mentioned the `split_list` part at all, only
> what it actually does and the change list should go below the `---`,
> please separate these things in the future.
> 

but you also applied it as is? I.e., outdated and far from helpful for
extracting and actual useful d/changelog entry.

please either amend commit messages on applying, if they're wrong, outdated,
..., otherwise reject the patch on that ground.