linux-kernel - Re: use of opaque subject lines

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:	Thu, 5 Feb 2015 18:22:23 +0000
From:	"Lad, Prabhakar" <prabhakar.csengg@...il.com>
To:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	OSUOSL Drivers <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>,
	Andreas Dilger <andreas.dilger@...el.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Oleg Drokin <oleg.drokin@...el.com>,
	hpdd-discuss <HPDD-discuss@...1.01.org>,
	Andreas Ruprecht <rupran@...server.de>
Subject: Re: use of opaque subject lines

On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 5:57 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 05, 2015 at 04:57:09PM +0000, Lad, Prabhakar wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 4:30 PM, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Feb 02, 2015 at 08:13:10PM +0100, Andreas Ruprecht wrote:
>> >
>> >> On a serious note: I do understand what you're getting at, I don't take
>> >> that personally (and I will send a v2 addressing the things above), but
>> >> honestly, this kind of answer might just be a real turn-off for other
>> >> people trying to get into kernel development...
>> >>
>> >> I don't want to start a whole new 'attitude in the kernel community'
>> >> discussion, but I can't just let this go like that, sorry.
>> >
>> > Just during the last 12 hours or so, I've seen the following l-k traffic:
>> >
>> > Subject: [PATCH] usb: host/sl811-hcd: fix sparse warning
>> > Subject: [PATCH] usb: gadget: function/f_sourcesink: fix sparse warning
>> > Subject: [PATCH] tty: vt/vt: fix sparse warning
>> > Subject: [PATCH] scsi: fix sparse warnings
>> > Subject: [PATCH] bfa: bfa_core: fix sparse warning
>> > Subject: [PATCH] scsi: fix sparse warning
>> > Subject: [PATCH] xen/acpi-processor: fix sparse warning
>> > Subject: [PATCH] scsi: initio: fix sparse warnings
>> > Subject: [PATCH] scsi: dc395x: fix sparse warning
>> > Subject: [PATCH] scsi: eata: fix sparse warning
>> > Subject: [PATCH] scsi: qla1280: fix sparse warnings
>> > Subject: [PATCH] scsi: ips: fix sparse warnings
>> > Subject: [PATCH] fbdev: via/via_clock: fix sparse warning
>> > Subject: [PATCH] usb: gadget: fix sparse warnings
>> > Subject: [PATCH] usb: gadget: fix sparse warnings
>> > Subject: [PATCH] usb: gadget: function/uvc_v4l2.c: fix sparse warnings
>> > Subject: [PATCH] xen-netback: fix sparse warning
>> > Subject: [PATCH] thermal: int340x: fix sparse warning
>> > Subject: [PATCH] vxge: fix sparse warning
>> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] xen-netback: fix sparse warning
>> > Subject: [PATCH] ixgbe: fix sparse warnings
>> > Subject: [PATCH] samsung-laptop: fix sparse warning
>> > Subject: [PATCH] x86: thinkpad_acpi.c: fix sparse warning
>> > Subject: [PATCH] Sony-laptop: fix sparse warning
>> >
>> all right I have stopped the script to send any more patches fixing
>> sparse warnings !
>
> That's not the point at all {sigh}
>
> The point is, if you are going to do fixes, also provide a valid subject
> line too.  Think of the people on the receiving end of your patch, they
> are the most valuable and limited resource our community has right now.
> You want to make it as _easy_ as possible for them to accept your
> contribution.  If you don't provide enough information, or drown them in
> redundancy, or crappy patches, they will just get frustrated and drop
> them all on the floor.
>
> And _NEVER_ have automated scripts create patches and send them out.  I
> only know of ONE person/bot that gets away with this, and you are not
> that person, sorry.  It it not a script on the receiving end of your
> output, so don't use a script to create a mess for them to dig through.
>
> I want these types of fixes, but make it easy for us to accept them, not
> hard, like Al is pointing out in very vivid detail.  To respond to his
> heartfelt plea and detailed instructions with a "fine, I'll just go
> away!" is disrespectful.
>
Sorry for that.

I agree a proper a description is needed ideally, but all these days prior to my
patches, the subject  line was 'fix sparse warnings' for such patches,
that’s the
reason I picked it for my script. I understand people get annoyed seeing so many
continuous patches with same subject line, ill make my script a bit smarter
to have detailed explanation now on.

Just a side note I verify the patch created by the script and if its
OK then only I post it to ML.

Regards,
--Prabhakar Lad
--
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/