Re: swsusp updates

[Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>]

Hi!

> > Okay, I killed few trivial hunks, will submit them through trivial
> > patch monkey. Are you happy now, patrick?
> 
> Why do you insist on abusing the trivial patch monkey? Why can't you send 
> them directly to the maintainers? For instance, you add/remove printk()s 
> and comments that other people may or may not want in there. 

If killing an noisy printk is not an trivial patch, I do not know what
else is. If you want me to keep some printks, tell me, and we can talk
about that.

> But no, this doesn't make me happy because you insist on munging multiple 
> patches together that have little to do with each other, besides the fact 
> they touch the same file. Like I said in private email, it really helps to 
> track down a problem if each patch and subsequent changeset is as small 
> and localized as possible. 

> And, that's a real problem with swsusp. It's a huge mess right now. I'd 
> like to see it work well and reliably for 2.6, and have the source code be 
> in a state where people can look at it without running away screaming. 
> Convoluted updates are not going to help the situation. 

Yes, and just now you are contributing for swsusp to stay in the messy
state. Thanx a lot.

If you want to become swsusp maintainer, say so, and you'll be fed
nice and split patches *once*. That's okay to do. But I'm not able/do
not have enough time to produce split patch each time Linus decides to
drop the mail into the bitbucket.

I really don't like "Linus dropped patch -> resubmit 2 patches merged"
resulting in you screaming "SPLIT IT UP!" on the lists.
								Pavel
-- 
When do you have a heart between your knees?
[Johanka's followup: and *two* hearts?]