From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-lf1-f42.google.com (mail-lf1-f42.google.com [209.85.167.42]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3A0614D127 for ; Thu, 11 Jan 2024 15:17:53 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=suse.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=suse.com header.i=@suse.com header.b="C7DPFKF2" Received: by mail-lf1-f42.google.com with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-50ed808db11so2449397e87.2 for ; Thu, 11 Jan 2024 07:17:53 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.com; s=google; t=1704986272; x=1705591072; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to :cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=89hILc8fV7OBcQ3dgWJZyYhw//2b4isBBhmMXFJEhAw=; b=C7DPFKF26TKMW6PIxoivqKUA5SrT38l7Ad2wSTuGTrdxOr4pvcn/XtJJnArSgAThBD +AJVaKIL3zWu3Alt1XtESNfGve9xBaNfbNeaQHzD/AZcQDKPGRQO5X0RjluT8WvmO0tY v60aOrPFce65cCrPyzmRBMfLDRSgAZ9AilBNYWnQGPLwxaH5Aqm+5LW9fYzpM/j/PWGH ApuHTQxZav7V9/TiGCDLYaicK1ctgwfRMLScHU817hX3cOxx/THJyBvCsfF98ReIHiKs O9lAUrz340sf20lrciVKgEE0YG/eTmAaGrMGZnMFpSDWCyllREaUHYu2bI15M6sKCR1A 86Og== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1704986272; x=1705591072; h=in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=89hILc8fV7OBcQ3dgWJZyYhw//2b4isBBhmMXFJEhAw=; b=lMhxN9y3c7HluxAnyK8YZ1DxPHDi+Qr1VYx3uxRIDA8sweQMzx4BOfcbu7Y045Hlch dAfWjmxIblFE6dv3XCVTLSVNFGui1mEMblQ4IGaX/sp9F3bQc6TTcFKOdfDoW2VbHpYS hLe6VoEyT6mPTABPFuodMA586dk8lZibGsYt9oDZADlShXd47we7AaNVh46ZTyynQhIF SZ6VMmQmtc8s/veR+6NmTi9a2amsMag4gaQRJKQMLWz5VT7J1fx8lL2JzB2S4yyEHvrW 2RvbOA+Xh19CQIE/h7SDiOto7uxMF+0ZyFBd3mr6mUIK23qBwXxT+iSUB1m0esR4CucZ D4eQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzyWI0TQEhXb3V8dRPxGTcB309SjSsnv6NU4Go6gFuj0VhHuvmS rMd8PYEE9acFu6errS1xHJ8vf/8aMZZISA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGQxjTvuqUbZLYG67DMQyCKnaTyvAuZG8a1BLSP0ZFzDwIZ8/MUR8Cx7JtmDfDxDr9JNiEvUQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:e85:b0:50e:abd1:bfc3 with SMTP id bi5-20020a0565120e8500b0050eabd1bfc3mr778644lfb.88.1704986272241; Thu, 11 Jan 2024 07:17:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from alley ([176.114.240.50]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id m23-20020a50ef17000000b0055751515a84sm709308eds.51.2024.01.11.07.17.51 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 11 Jan 2024 07:17:52 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2024 16:17:50 +0100 From: Petr Mladek To: Marcos Paulo de Souza Cc: Jonathan Corbet , Attreyee M , Bagas Sanjaya , jpoimboe@kernel.org, jikos@kernel.org, mbenes@suse.cz, joe.lawrence@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, live-patching@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Documentation/livepatch: Update terminology in livepatch Message-ID: References: <20231223205813.32083-1-tintinm2017@gmail.com> <87o7eg607d.fsf@meer.lwn.net> <87jzohoy02.fsf@meer.lwn.net> <49cfdce3094fcc37ecf01bb358509c64ee8feed9.camel@suse.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <49cfdce3094fcc37ecf01bb358509c64ee8feed9.camel@suse.com> On Wed 2024-01-10 15:51:40, Marcos Paulo de Souza wrote: > On Wed, 2024-01-10 at 11:15 -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > > Attreyee M 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, IMHO, it is much worse on the maintainers' side. There is a lack of maintainers. And I believe that most of them have hard times to manage the load. They should provide hints. But we could not expect that they would do the work. > 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...). Attreyee, please read Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst before you send another version. Also please run scripts/checkpatch.pl before you send the patches. > 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. I suggest that Attreyee makes another attempt himself. John explained what was the problem. Attreyee could get inspiration from the git history. Anyway, the commit message simply should explain why "acquire" is better than "get". Best Regards, Petr