linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5/8] Documentation: Replacing reference to broken submission format URL

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 23 May 2013 23:16:19 -0500
From:	Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>
To:	Ben Minerds <puzzleduck@...il.com>
Cc:	greg@...ah.com, Ben Minerds <PuZZleDucK@...il.com>,
	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/8] Documentation: Replacing reference to broken
 submission format URL

On 05/23/2013 07:49:57 AM, Ben Minerds wrote:
>  Replacing refs to broken URL with internal documentation reference,  
> and a
>  little whitespace shuffle to keep it under 80 chars wide.
> 
>  Signed-off-by: Ben Minerds <puzzleduck@...il.com>
> ---
>  Documentation/HOWTO                   | 10 +++++-----
>  Documentation/SubmittingPatches       |  2 +-
>  Documentation/ja_JP/HOWTO             |  8 ++++----
>  Documentation/ja_JP/SubmittingPatches |  2 +-
>  Documentation/ko_KR/HOWTO             |  2 +-
>  Documentation/zh_CN/HOWTO             |  2 +-
>  Documentation/zh_CN/SubmittingPatches |  2 +-
>  7 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/HOWTO b/Documentation/HOWTO
> index 11e597e..fba34c0 100644
> --- a/Documentation/HOWTO
> +++ b/Documentation/HOWTO
> @@ -110,11 +110,11 @@ required reading:
>      subject to scrutiny for content and style), but not following  
> them
>      will almost always prevent it.
> 
> -    Other excellent descriptions of how to create patches properly  
> are:
> -	"The Perfect Patch"
> -		 
> Documentation/development-process/patches/The-Perfect-Patch.txt
> -	"Linux kernel patch submission format"
> -		http://linux.yyz.us/patch-format.html
> +  Other excellent descriptions of how to create patches properly are:
> +    "The Perfect Patch"
> +      Documentation/development-process/patches/The-Perfect-Patch.txt
> +    "Linux kernel patch submission format"
> +       
> Documentation/development-process/patches/Patch-Submission-Format.txt

Ok, this is the third consecutive patch to do approximately the same  
thing, and now you're patching lines you added in a previous patch in  
the same series.

Breaking files up into stages helps with bisectability. Are we really  
going to "git bisect" documentation?

On the larger question of "is this a good idea", I'm leaning towards  
"no" and would like you to explain why an 8 year old description  
duplicating portions of SubmittingPatches needs to be in-tree.

Rob--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/