On Thu, Apr 2, 2026 at 1:00 AM Tamir Duberstein <[email protected]> wrote: > > This description is inconsistent with the previous one which had > citations for both the feature (function in this case) and the feature > in which it became stable (available in this case). I don't prefer > either style in particular, just that things are consistent.
Sure, I added a couple references. I think it is good to be consistent (well, at least within a patch series, but I wouldn't say no to more information even if it is inconsistent sometimes, especially across different patch series, since everyone writes messages a bit differently...). Cheers, Miguel
