From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932474AbcARWkj (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jan 2016 17:40:39 -0500 Received: from tex.lwn.net ([70.33.254.29]:38137 "EHLO vena.lwn.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755517AbcARWkh (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jan 2016 17:40:37 -0500 Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 15:40:35 -0700 From: Jonathan Corbet To: Diego Viola Cc: Jiri Kosina , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] README: cosmetic fixes Message-ID: <20160118154035.31455402@lwn.net> In-Reply-To: References: <1449345010-12512-1-git-send-email-diego.viola@gmail.com> <20151210113423.168f8b4d@lwn.net> Organization: LWN.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 17:53:02 -0200 Diego Viola wrote: > The thing I'm unsure about is that the pull request contained trivial > changes from others as well, and my patch was trivial, yes. > > So why not include my changes with the other trivial changes as well? I set aside when I raised my initial complaint, and it stayed set aside. I'll consider it again, but I'm not very enthusiastic about applying stylistic fixes. We really don't need trivial patch wars over how many exclamation points belong on a given sentence. Diego, I'd like to ask you to sit back a bit and think about what you are really trying to accomplish. Maintainers are busy people, and you place a demand on their time whenever you post a patch. That time is available in *very* limited quantities for patches that don't really make the kernel better. Please think a bit about why you're doing this, and how you might direct your energy toward creating changes that maintainers actively want to apply. That will leave everybody better off than nagging people about cosmetic changes. Thanks, jon