linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/8] Documentation: nfsroot.txt: convert to ReST

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:   Tue, 31 Dec 2019 08:32:13 -0700
From:   Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
To:     "Daniel W. S. Almeida" <dwlsalmeida@...il.com>
Cc:     mchehab+samsung@...nel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, skhan@...uxfoundation.org,
        linux-kernel-mentees@...ts.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/8] Documentation: nfsroot.txt: convert to ReST

On Tue, 31 Dec 2019 01:08:11 -0300
"Daniel W. S. Almeida" <dwlsalmeida@...il.com> wrote:

> Would you please rephrase this? My first language isn't English and I am 
> not sure I understood that.
> 
> > It's best in general to avoid refilling paragraphs so as to make it clear
> > what is being changed.  But we would also like to avoid creating such long
> > lines.  Perhaps an add-on patch refilling things would satisfy both
> > criteria here.  

Changing text in an existing paragraph can
result in line lengths that are inconsistent and ragged, leading to a less 
pleasant appearance
and the temptation to "refill" the paragraph so that the 
lines are all approximately equal in length.  The problem with yielding
to that temptation is that it messes up
the diff output so that you can no longer easily see the actual
text changes that were made.

Thus, when making such changes, it can be better to not refill the
paragraphs - as, indeed, you did not.  But if the result becomes too
difficult to read (as in, it creates lines that are waaaay to long), it
can be good to create a second patch that makes only the cosmetic changes
without any associated text changes.  I was suggesting doing that in this
case.

Does that help?

Thanks,

jon