From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754564AbYEaQXj (ORCPT ); Sat, 31 May 2008 12:23:39 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752921AbYEaQX3 (ORCPT ); Sat, 31 May 2008 12:23:29 -0400 Received: from vps1.tull.net ([66.180.172.116]:48376 "HELO vps1.tull.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1752798AbYEaQX3 (ORCPT ); Sat, 31 May 2008 12:23:29 -0400 X-Spam-Check-By: mail.local.tull.net Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2008 02:23:13 +1000 From: Nick Andrew To: Jesper Juhl Cc: Jonathan Corbet , Cyrill Gorcunov , rdunlap@xenotime.net, tytso@mit.edu, hch@infradead.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, Andrew Morton Subject: Re: CFD: linux-wanking@vger.kernel.org (was [PATCH] Standard indentation of arguments) Message-ID: <20080531162312.GA5599@tull.net> References: <9a8748490805211306l50b8411ax4462be18c94ca065@mail.gmail.com> <32279.1211401651@vena.lwn.net> <9a8748490805211337q1e7ceab7i80e4820c46f8171b@mail.gmail.com> <9a8748490805211646s5ef93f8ey43ebbc7746fb1a3b@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <9a8748490805211646s5ef93f8ey43ebbc7746fb1a3b@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17+20080114 (2008-01-14) X-SMTPD: qpsmtpd/0.26, http://develooper.com/code/qpsmtpd/ Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Suggestions ... On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 01:46:28AM +0200, Jesper Juhl wrote: > Ok, here's a first (very) rough draft of a KernelNewbieGuide document. > It can certainly be expanded a lot and my grammar and spelling is far > from perfect, but hey, it's a first rough draft :) [...] > - Go through the kernel Bugzilla (http://bugzilla.kernel.org/) and see > if you can fix any of the many bugs filed in it. There's a metric > butload of bugs filed in there that need attention. "buttload" > As far as tools go, all you really need are the tools compile the > kernel (gcc, make etc) and a text editor to edit the source - vi, > emacs, joe, almost anything will do fine. "tools _to_ compile the kernel" > Developing against anything older than the latest stable kernel is > likely to be a waste of effort due to the rapid pace of > development. Once you finish your patch against a several months (or > even weeks) old kernel, your patch runs a great risk of being obsolete > or impossible to apply (this greatly depends on the area you work on > ofcours cince some areas change more rapidly than others, but do try "of course, since" > If your patch did not get applied and you recieved an ACK or some "received" > criticism about your patch, then your job is easy. If there's a very > explicit rejection of the patch by the maintainer of the code with a > good reason, then don't bother sending it again, it probably will > never be applied. If the patch received improvement suggestions or > other review comments, then you should create a new version of your > patch that adresses the feedback you get and then re-submit (it's > usually a good idea to list what stuff you've adressed when > re-submitting). "addressed". I'd probably make a few grammatical changes too. When you're happy with the content and your document is in the tree, I'll submit a patch :-) Nick. -- PGP Key ID = 0x418487E7 http://www.nick-andrew.net/ PGP Key fingerprint = B3ED 6894 8E49 1770 C24A 67E3 6266 6EB9 4184 87E7