linux-kernel - Re: about the flood of trivial patches and the Code of Conduct

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: <5523D9EE.5070001@hurleysoftware.com>
Date:	Tue, 07 Apr 2015 09:21:50 -0400
From:	Peter Hurley <peter@...leysoftware.com>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
CC:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: about the flood of trivial patches and the Code of Conduct

On 04/07/2015 07:18 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> 
>> On Tue, Apr 07, 2015 at 11:12:46AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>> Pointing out this truth and protecting against such abusive flood of 
>>> trivial patches is not against the code of conduct I signed.
>>
>> I totally agree, it's not "against" the code of conflict that I 
>> helped write.
>>
>> Joe, you know better than to send trivial stuff to maintainers who 
>> don't want it.  Send it through the trivial maintainer for 
>> subsystems that have expressed annoyance at this, it's not the first 
>> time this has happened.
> 
> I argue that they should not be sent _at all_ in such cases, not even 
> via the trivial tree: firstly because typically I'll pick up the bits 
> from the trivial tree as well, and secondly because most of the 
> arguments I listed against bulk trivial commits (weaker bisectability, 
> taking up reviewer bandwidth, taking up Git space, etc.) still stand.

And requires backports for -stable.

Regards,
Peter Hurley
--
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/