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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Fri, 4 Jan 2008 21:03:53 +0100
From:	"Paolo Ciarrocchi" <paolo.ciarrocchi@...il.com>
To:	"Andi Kleen" <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc:	"Theodore Tso" <tytso@....edu>,
	"Mathieu Segaud" <mathieu.segaud@...ala.cx>,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [Coding Style]: misc fixes for fs/ext{3,4}/acl.{c,h} from checkpatch.pl

On Jan 4, 2008 8:41 PM, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> wrote:
[...]
> > I don't know, because people want to be able to say that they've
> > contributed fixes to the Linux kernel?
>
> My pet theory is that it is similar to the "unsubscribe me"
> cascade effect you sometimes see on mailing lists. One person
> sends a "unsubscribe me" to everybody and then suddenly a lot of
> people think that is the right way to unsubscribe and reply
> with lots of "unsubscribe me too".
>
> So one person sends a cleanup and it gets accepted and suddenly
> other people realize it is very easy to do these cleanups
> (not realizing the hidden costs they have) and then they go on...

Since I'm one of those people that sent "Codying style fixes" patches
I give my contribution to this discussion as well.

I think that _one_ of the reasons that made a few people sent this kind of
patches to the list is because checkpatch.pl is far better then any other
 kerneljanitor scripts/easy task and _seems_ to be an easy way to start
understanding the code, creation of patches and process in general.

> I thought we had the janitor project to steer these people into
> more useful directions, but apparently that is not well known
> enough anymore. Perhaps it just needs to be more regularly announced?
>
> Although I must admit I am not 100% happy with kernel-janitors
> either -- e.g. a few times I sent suggestions about easy things
> someone could do to that list, but never heard anything back.
>
> Anyways there are lots of ways to do trivial cleanups in a useful
> way and if people want to do this perhaps they should just
> ask on linux-kernel and people suggest something?

Yes please do that.
Even if fixing errors reported by checkpatch.pl still sounds like a
useful way to spent a couple of hours.
Maybe our mistake was to send the patches to lkml instead of to
trivial@...nel.org
or to kerneljanitors?

I mean, I now understand the rationales behind your complaints but I
don't think it's
 good idea to discourage people willing to perform easy task.
They just need guidance in order to be useful.

> My hope here is of course that these trivial changes are primarily
> used as a way to get "the feet wet" to understand the procedures
> for contribuing larger not quite as trivial changes

Agreed.

ciao,
-- 
Paolo
http://paolo.ciarrocchi.googlepages.com/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Powered by blists - more mailing lists