linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 00/11] docs: remove submitting-drivers.rst

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, 28 Jun 2022 06:52:20 +0200
From:   Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@...il.com>
To:     Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@...il.com>
Cc:     Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Federico Vaga <federico.vaga@...a.pv.it>,
        Alex Shi <alexs@...nel.org>,
        Yanteng Si <siyanteng@...ngson.cn>,
        Hu Haowen <src.res@...il.cn>,
        "open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-doc-tw-discuss@...ts.sourceforge.net,
        Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.com>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org,
        kernel-janitors <kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 00/11] docs: remove submitting-drivers.rst

On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 4:50 AM Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On 6/27/22 22:18, Lukas Bulwahn wrote:
> > As future work---with this one submitting checklist gone---I see the harder
> > follow-up task to synchronize and clean up the various submission hints/
> > guidelines/checklists in the remaining kernel documentation that partly
> > overlap and differ in detail, their structure (unstructured, unordered
> > lists vs. sections and subsections) and their state of being outdated:
> >
> >   Documentation/process/submit-checklist.rst
> >   Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
> >   MAINTAINERS#Tips for patch submitters
> >
> > My next task at hand is to read through all three documents, figure out
> > what still applies and what is outdated, determine a good common structure
> > for all three documents, include cross-links and make them to some extent
> > follow a clear consistent policy. E.g., one document is a more detailed
> > description of everything mentioned in the short list of another document.
> > I will try to work through that in the next months or motivate and guide
> > some colleague or mentee to work together with me on that.
> >
>
> Hi,
>
> I think MAINTAINERS#Tips for patch submitters contains redundant info
> compared to other submission guidelines, and some tips there are outdated
> (like using `diff -u` instead of git). For consistency, that section can
> be removed (in your next RFC series).
>

Thanks for the suggestion. I noticed the outdated hint on 'diff -u' as well.
I was considering replacing it with 'Use git format-patch and git
send-email to get submitting patches via email right.'. (or to avoid
some pitfalls when submitting patches, I have not decided yet).

But let us first clean up the submitting-drivers with this patch
series and get this done.

Lukas

> --
> An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara