netdev - Re: [RFC] Any value in having a netdev FAQ?

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: <1374006863.12825.115.camel@envy.home>
Date:	Tue, 16 Jul 2013 13:34:23 -0700
From:	Darren Hart <dvhart@...ux.intel.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	paul.gortmaker@...driver.com, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Any value in having a netdev FAQ?

On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 13:05 -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>
> Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2013 22:59:54 -0400
> 
> > I was wondering if you think there is value in having a netdev-faq type
> > document available -- perhaps as a vger mailout to new subscribers or
> > similar?  For example, I have lost count of the number of times that you
> > have had to tell people that net-next is closed during the merge window.
> > But you would probably be right in telling me that those same people don't
> > read documentation.  Well, that aside, I suppose answering my question
> > is easier when there is a proposed starting point for content.
> > 
> > To that end, I've tried to collect a starting point based on repeated
> > questions/corrections that I've seen over the years.  I've added Greg to
> > the Cc: in order to ensure I've captured the netdev-stable interaction
> > correctly, and I've thrown Darren under the bus as a random content
> > reviewer, since he has expressed an interest in documentation recently.
> > 
> > Below is a possible starting point for content.  Many answers I have
> > written are from memory, long after losing links to netdev threads that
> > served as evidence for the answers, so apologies in advance if I have
> > failed to recall correctly the specific details in which you would like
> > to see things done.
> 
> Thanks a lot for writing this, it is useful.
> 
> I think it's easier if this lives somewhere under
> Documentation/networking in the kernel tree, then we can just point
> people at it.
> 
> What do you think?

I was going to recommend the same. Ideally we would have sort of
consistent documentation subsystem policy naming scheme to aid in
finding and referencing documents.

Documentation/contributing.txt
Documentation/networking/contibuting.txt
Documentation/stable/contributing.txt

That might not be the best choice in naming, but consistency always
makes things easier to find, especially in such a large system.

-- 
Darren Hart
Intel Open Source Technology Center
Yocto Project - Linux Kernel


--
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