[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87wmh8p5ag.fsf@trenco.lwn.net>
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2024 13:26:31 -0700
From: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
To: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>, anish kumar
<yesanishhere@...il.com>, lgirdwood@...il.com, broonie@...nel.org,
perex@...ex.cz, tiwai@...e.com, Sebastian Fricke
<sebastian.fricke@...labora.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-sound@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] ALSA: Add debugging guide for audio issues
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org> writes:
> On 11/7/24 2:25 PM, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
>> If we really want to separate the mechanics of kernel development from
>> the associated process information - not always an easy separation, IMO
>> - we could make a top-level "development" directory, put a lot of the
>> other relevant stuff there, and include the debugging stuff. It seems
>> really weird to put debugging by itself, though; it's only part of the
>> picture.
>
> I could go with that.
>
>>
>> Why is Documentation/process so bad?
>
> Documentation/process/ is meta-documentation about kernel social "standards"
> among other things. It is "soft" documentation, whereas debugging (IMHO) is
> "hard" documentation.
>
> But hey, it's all your baby. Do whatever pleases you. :)
Hopefully not all mine...:)
My suggestion is to put it under process for now just to not block
forward progress on this work. We can surely relocate it if we want to
make a proper development-processes top-level directory in the future.
Thanks,
jon
Powered by blists - more mailing lists