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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Wed, 13 May 2020 11:14:56 +1000 (AEST)
From:   Finn Thain <fthain@...egraphics.com.au>
To:     Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Christophe Jaillet <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>
Subject: Re: net/sonic: Fix some resource leaks in error handling paths

On Tue, 12 May 2020, Markus Elfring wrote:

> > Markus, if you were to write a patch to improve upon coding-style.rst, 
> > who should review it?
> 
> All involved contributors have got chances to provide constructive 
> comments.

But how could someone be elevated to "involved contributor" if their 
patches were to be blocked by arbitrary application of the rules?

> I would be curious who will actually dare to contribute further ideas 
> for this area.
> 

You seem to be uniquely positioned to do that, if only because you cited 
rules which don't appear to support your objection.

> 
> > If you are unable to write or review such a patch, how can you hope to 
> > adjudicate compliance?
> 
> I can also try to achieve more improvements here to see how the 
> available software documentation will evolve.
> 

When the people who write and review the coding standards are the same 
people who write and review the code, the standards devolve (given the 
prevailing incentives).

> Regards, 
> Markus
> 

Powered by blists - more mailing lists