Patch Submission Guidelines

[ricaljasan <ricaljasan at pacific dot net>]

As I prepare my patchset for the manual, I have a few questions about
how to format the submission.

It will be of the [PATCH M/N] form, one for each of the chapters.  Is it
acceptable to use a lengthier and detailed description in 0/N that
covers everything in all the subsequent patches (these are all
grammar-related edits), and omit a description in each patch, leaving
only a title and consistent, terse summary?  For example:

Grammatical edits to the Error Reporting chapter.

        * manual/errno.texi: Edit grammar for clarity, consistency, and
        correctness.

Also, are ChangeLog entries still necessary?  I recall those being under
discussion[1,2,3] but am still unclear as to what ever truly became of
it.  The Contribution checklist[4] mentions them, including the bit
about editing the file but putting the diff in the message body and not
the patch.  I see a variety of formats used in practice from a cursory
look over the past week or so, but the most common appears to be:

----
Detailed message.

Some kind of header, possibly a name, subject, or date-name-email.

        * list of changed files

Attached patch.
----

(with a notable lack of an explicit ChangeLog diff.)  Perhaps there is a
preferred blend of git format-patch and send-email that will do the
right thing?

Thank you,
Rical

[1]: https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2015-08/msg00889.html
[2]: https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2015-06/msg00051.html
[3]: https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2015-08/msg01279.html
[4]:
https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/Contribution%20checklist#Properly_Formatted_GNU_ChangeLog