From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lwn.net header.i=@lwn.net header.b="abXxMwtJ" Received: from ms.lwn.net (ms.lwn.net [45.79.88.28]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 72DA5173F; Wed, 29 Nov 2023 06:29:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:2601:280:5e00:7e19::646]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ms.lwn.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 50CE037A; Wed, 29 Nov 2023 14:29:36 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 ms.lwn.net 50CE037A DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lwn.net; s=20201203; t=1701268176; bh=nBZchssDZ6Eyz0mpW9mYTJOi1nU2SQQKig5pHaps0S4=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=abXxMwtJ4WQmFsjUs9w2OqJqBmXQXtHaXEwDpPw4zHeilK/RIY7ULPtzPZrFKkeEX jtXuLmScg1feFawPT9cyxzbiGoI8vlk8ksSq1hd3p7Pl/oUZv9Am2vv/MtFHU7MR/i 0NgB5zMJXCUvbpC9GNmFW/prrdtM5BcIA6rJhr8Z228EY7kGD2TKDrWJMg8u74k2pR mBZdWgZ0cWd+4U3p0e1ARIsoIgdWngglDLQjI4pdX2HM4pZIqR/nJKLrMEkAkfl+Tw EMoBmbnM8Y8VAFPJ1fpUFw0W1JjNHNT+oA4Yasw18qMJ3v7JXeEW0YVxGNpEmJqtT/ gbP13Nec8th8Q== From: Jonathan Corbet To: Bagas Sanjaya , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux Documentation , Linux Kernel Livepatching Cc: Josh Poimboeuf , Jiri Kosina , Miroslav Benes , Petr Mladek , Joe Lawrence , Attreyee Mukherjee , Bagas Sanjaya Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Minor grammatical fixup for livepatch docs In-Reply-To: <20231129132527.8078-1-bagasdotme@gmail.com> References: <20231129132527.8078-1-bagasdotme@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2023 07:29:35 -0700 Message-ID: <874jh4pr8w.fsf@meer.lwn.net> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: live-patching@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Bagas Sanjaya writes: > I was prompted to write this little grammar fix series when reading > the fix from Attreyee [1], with review comments requesting changes > to that fix. So here's my version of the fix, with reviews from [1] > addressed (and distinct grammar fixes splitted). How is this helpful? Why are you trying to push aside somebody who is working toward a first contribution to the kernel? This is not the way to help somebody learn to work with the kernel community. Attreyee, I would like to encourage you to redo your patch set based on the feedback you have received so that we can apply it. Thanks, jon