linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Re: linux-2.6.19-rc5-g088406bc build #120 failed

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]

Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0611131845100.9789@iabervon.org>
Date:	Mon, 13 Nov 2006 19:00:02 -0500 (EST)
From:	Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@...ervon.org>
To:	Paul Fulghum <paulkf@...rogate.com>
cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, Krzysztof Halasa <khc@...waw.pl>,
	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>,
	Toralf Förster <toralf.foerster@....de>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Re: linux-2.6.19-rc5-g088406bc build #120 failed

On Mon, 13 Nov 2006, Paul Fulghum wrote:

> I'm not really sure how to preempt objections
> with the changelog. The objections seemed to be
> against the fundemental mechanism of the patch.

In your changelog, explain why you're doing things differently from how 
some people will suggest. That way, when new people read the new thread 
started by your new patch, they see the results of the previous cycle and 
don't rehash old arguments. This also means that people in the future 
wondering why the code is weird there can find out without extensive 
mailing list searching.

	-Daniel
*This .sig left intentionally blank*
-
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/