| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <1378174887.1953.152.camel@joe-AO722> Date: Mon, 02 Sep 2013 19:21:27 -0700 From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> To: Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org> Cc: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...el.com>, David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>, Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>, ksummit-2013-discuss@...ts.linuxfoundation.org, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Mauro Carvalho Chehab <m.chehab@...sung.com>, Wang Shilong <wangshilong1991@...il.com> Subject: Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [PATCH] checkpatch: Add comment about updating Documentation/CodingStyle On Mon, 2013-09-02 at 19:12 -0700, Josh Triplett wrote: > On Mon, Sep 02, 2013 at 06:52:45PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > > On Mon, 2013-09-02 at 18:34 -0700, Josh Triplett wrote: > > > I'd suggest a couple more, which > > > *should* always make sense, and to the best of my knowledge don't tend > > > to generate false positives: Hey Josh. I don't want to enable too many types of messages because the "barrier to entry" to submit patches shouldn't be so high that it discourages people. I feel mostly that many types of checkpatch messages are OK to emit, but aren't necessary to fix and people should feel that checkpatch isn't a necessary thing to silence before patches are accepted. cheers, Joe -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists