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]

Message-ID: <CA+ToGPHa9Kwg3+8o5=sLfvAZk6oTwvscMOXp-Y0mZePN3cVOTw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 19 Jan 2016 04:24:18 -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 Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 12:40 AM, Diego Viola <diego.viola@...il.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 11:32 PM, Diego Viola <diego.viola@...il.com> wrote:
>> 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
>
> Would you consider my patch if I send another patch that addresses the
> complaint you brought it up?
>
> No rush, apologies for that.
>
> Diego

I've just sent a new email that I hope will address the complaints you
mentioned earlier.

Diego