From: SF Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
To: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>,
Jonathan Cameron <jic23@jic23.retrosnub.co.uk>,
linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, linux-input@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>,
Hartmut Knaack <knaack.h@gmx.de>, Jiri Kosina <jikos@kernel.org>,
Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>,
Peter Meerwald-Stadler <pmeerw@pmeerw.net>,
Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Software evolution around “checkpatch.pl”?
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2018 19:30:15 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a988eca2-36d4-19bd-e92c-1a92e497e0da@users.sourceforge.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1518284577.16865.8.camel@perches.com>
>> So I think checkpatch is striking the right balance here in
>> how it warns. Obviously if it could assess the text
>> and come to an informed decision that would be great but
>> we are some way from that ;)
>
> The 'informed' bit is difficult as it is mostly a political problem.
I find such a view very interesting.
> I just wish Markus would improve his consistently terrible commit messages
I tried to achieve another clarification a few times.
> that just restate the action being done and detail
> _why_ a particular thing _should_ be done.
Unfortunately, it seems that no other contributors picked
corresponding opportunities up so far.
You indicated also special software development challenges in your commit
“checkpatch: attempt to find unnecessary 'out of memory' messages”.
https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/6/10/382
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=ebfdc40969f24fc0cdd1349835d36e8ebae05374
> His acceptance rate would improve as many of these back and forth
> replies for what trivialities he posts as patches would be minimized.
My selection of change possibilities leads to mixed integration results.
I stumbled on variations for general change resistance.
Regards,
Markus
prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-02-10 18:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-01-31 21:26 [PATCH] hid-sensor-accel-3d: Delete an error message for a failed memory allocation in hid_accel_3d_probe() SF Markus Elfring
2018-02-04 11:23 ` Jonathan Cameron
2018-02-05 18:26 ` SF Markus Elfring
2018-02-05 21:51 ` Jonathan Cameron
2018-02-06 8:45 ` Software evolution around “checkpatch.pl”? SF Markus Elfring
2018-02-10 14:53 ` Jonathan Cameron
2018-02-10 14:59 ` Joe Perches
2018-02-10 15:57 ` Jonathan Cameron
2018-02-10 17:42 ` Joe Perches
2018-02-10 18:30 ` SF Markus Elfring [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=a988eca2-36d4-19bd-e92c-1a92e497e0da@users.sourceforge.net \
--to=elfring@users.sourceforge.net \
--cc=jic23@jic23.retrosnub.co.uk \
--cc=jic23@kernel.org \
--cc=jikos@kernel.org \
--cc=joe@perches.com \
--cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=knaack.h@gmx.de \
--cc=lars@metafoo.de \
--cc=linux-iio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-input@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pmeerw@pmeerw.net \
--cc=srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).