netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/3] TIPC: Removing EXPERIMENTAL label

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: <20120525190506.GB25102@windriver.com>
Date:	Fri, 25 May 2012 15:05:06 -0400
From:	Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC:	<jon.maloy@...csson.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	<tipc-discussion@...ts.sourceforge.net>, <ying.xue@...driver.com>,
	<erik.hugne@...csson.com>, <allan.stephens@...driver.com>,
	<maloy@...jonn.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] TIPC: Removing EXPERIMENTAL label

[Re: [PATCH 1/3] TIPC: Removing EXPERIMENTAL label] On 24/05/2012 (Thu 16:12) David Miller wrote:

> From: Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>
> Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 15:58:16 -0400
> 
> > But for new TIPC development features, future direction, and things like
> > that -- making the right call requires intimate understanding of TIPC
> > and its users, which is something that a maintainer should have but
> > something I know I don't have.  (A man has to know his limitations.)
> > 
> > In this context, I'm not talking about these three trivial patches; but
> > more complicated stuff that I imagine will be floated in the future.
> > 
> > To that end, I can still review and call out issues in a crap patch when
> > I see them.  But I'd like to see new stuff sent to netdev, so that folks
> > smarter than me have a chance to catch when a patch appears generally OK
> > but is architecturally the wrong direction etc.
> 
> For maintainership, taste is more important than deep knowledge of the
> specific technology.  Worst case you ask the submitter to explain the
> background of their change more thoroughly and that information is an
> absolutely requirement in the commit message and code comments
> anyways.

OK, what I'm hearing is that you'd prefer I continue to collect up TIPC
patches and issue pull requests for a while longer.  I can do that.  Any
specifics of how you'd like things done? -- e.g. if the reviews of new
TIPC development patches takes place here on netdev before I stage them,
will that create extra work for you dealing with them in patchworks?

Paul.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html