Re: [PATCH] Documentation/livepatch: Update terminology in livepatch

[Marcos Paulo de Souza <mpdesouza@suse.com>]

On Wed, 2024-01-10 at 11:15 -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> Attreyee M <tintinm2017@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> > Hello maintainers, 
> > 
> > I wanted to ask if this patch of mine is accepted as of now. 
> 
> You never responded to the question that is still quoted in your
> (unfortunately top-posted) email:
> 
> > So this is a classic example of saying what you have done, but not
> > why.
> > What makes this a change that we want?
> 
> So no, not accepted.  Even with a proper changelog, though, I'm not
> sure
> I see the value in that particular change.

From time to time I see people complaining about the lack of new people
coming to kernel development, and that Documentation would be a good
start for some of them to learn how to send patches by email (which by
itself is difficult...).

As Documentation patches aren't backported, why not accept this patch?

Jon, I understand your reasoning, but I agree with Attreyee here. The
term "acquire" fits better when in conjunction with "released" than
"get".

Can you show an example of a good commit message to Attreyee so he can
adjust and resend? I'm sure the next time he'll consider remember the
suggestion given and the next patch will have a better commit message.

Thanks,
  Marcos

> 
> jon
>