linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] README: cosmetic fixes

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:	Mon, 18 Jan 2016 23:32:21 -0200
From:	Diego Viola <diego.viola@...il.com>
To:	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Cc:	Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] README: cosmetic fixes

On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 8:40 PM, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net> wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 17:53:02 -0200
> Diego Viola <diego.viola@...il.com> wrote:
>
>> The thing I'm unsure about is that the pull request contained trivial
>> changes from others as well, and my patch was trivial, yes.
>>
>> So why not include my changes with the other trivial changes as well?
>
> I set aside when I raised my initial complaint, and it stayed set aside.

After your complaint, I provided and suggested examples about
improving the section in the README that you complained about, I also
asked for your feedback, but you remained silent.

I was hoping to get your feedback and we would improve that section together.

>
> I'll consider it again, but I'm not very enthusiastic about applying
> stylistic fixes.  We really don't need trivial patch wars over how many
> exclamation points belong on a given sentence.

I understand, but the exclamation point is just one fix, there are
other fixes in my patch.

>
> Diego, I'd like to ask you to sit back a bit and think about what you are
> really trying to accomplish.  Maintainers are busy people, and you place a
> demand on their time whenever you post a patch.  That time is available in
> *very* limited quantities for patches that don't really make the kernel
> better.  Please think a bit about why you're doing this, and how you might
> direct your energy toward creating changes that maintainers actively want
> to apply.  That will leave everybody better off than nagging people about
> cosmetic changes.

I'm just trying to improve the documentation, I want to improve the
state of the documentation and the README, why is this so hard to do?

I understand you don't have the time to review small patches like
mine, so wouldn't it make sense to delegate this work or activity to
someone else that has the time?

>
> Thanks,
>
> jon

Thanks,

Diego