[U-Boot-Users] Request to mailing list U-Boot-Users rejected

[U-Boot-Users] Request to mailing list U-Boot-Users rejected

[Haavard Skinnemoen]

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 08:23:21 -0800
u-boot-users-bounces at lists.sourceforge.net wrote:

> "Your message was too big; please trim it to less than 40 KB in size."

Oh for fsck sakes...

> Message body is too big: 40979 bytes with a limit of 40 KB

If you can't cut me 900 bytes of slack, I'm not going to bother
anymore. That patch was _seriously_ painful and I'm not going to do it
again just to shave off enough to get it below the arbitrary
mailing-list limit.

Haavard

[U-Boot-Users] Request to mailing list U-Boot-Users rejected

[Stefan Roese]

On Tuesday 11 December 2007, Haavard Skinnemoen wrote:
> u-boot-users-bounces at lists.sourceforge.net wrote:
> > "Your message was too big; please trim it to less than 40 KB in size."
>
> Oh for fsck sakes...
>
> > Message body is too big: 40979 bytes with a limit of 40 KB
>
> If you can't cut me 900 bytes of slack, I'm not going to bother
> anymore. That patch was _seriously_ painful and I'm not going to do it
> again just to shave off enough to get it below the arbitrary
> mailing-list limit.

100k limit, please.

Best regards,
Stefan

=====================================================================
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: +49-8142-66989-0 Fax: +49-8142-66989-80  Email: office at denx.de
=====================================================================

[U-Boot-Users] Request to mailing list U-Boot-Users rejected

[Mike Frysinger]

On Tuesday 11 December 2007, Haavard Skinnemoen wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 08:23:21 -0800
>
> u-boot-users-bounces at lists.sourceforge.net wrote:
> > "Your message was too big; please trim it to less than 40 KB in size."
>
> Oh for fsck sakes...
>
> > Message body is too big: 40979 bytes with a limit of 40 KB
>
> If you can't cut me 900 bytes of slack, I'm not going to bother
> anymore. That patch was _seriously_ painful and I'm not going to do it
> again just to shave off enough to get it below the arbitrary
> mailing-list limit.

it's an automated message ... it isnt like Wolfgang is sitting there a 
rejecting each one

related, i'd agree that a 40kb limit on a list that expects to be getting 
[sometimes sizable] patches is wrong
-mike
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 827 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20071211/95273386/attachment.pgp 

[U-Boot-Users] Request to mailing list U-Boot-Users rejected

[Scott Wood]

Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Tuesday 11 December 2007, Haavard Skinnemoen wrote:
>>> Message body is too big: 40979 bytes with a limit of 40 KB
>> If you can't cut me 900 bytes of slack, I'm not going to bother
>> anymore. That patch was _seriously_ painful and I'm not going to do it
>> again just to shave off enough to get it below the arbitrary
>> mailing-list limit.
> 
> it's an automated message ... it isnt like Wolfgang is sitting there a 
> rejecting each one

No, but he has sat there rejecting all prior requests to increase the 
limit...

-Scott

[U-Boot-Users] Request to mailing list U-Boot-Users rejected

[Timur Tabi]

Stefan Roese wrote:

> 100k limit, please.

Me too.  40k is too small.  100k is much better.

-- 
Timur Tabi
Linux kernel developer at Freescale

[U-Boot-Users] Request to mailing list U-Boot-Users rejected

[Wolfgang Denk]

In message <200712112009.06587.sr@denx.de> you wrote:
>
> > > Message body is too big: 40979 bytes with a limit of 40 KB
...
> 100k limit, please.

And what happens whith the next posting with a size of 100k + N bytes?


Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
"Obviously, a major malfunction has occurred."
              -- Steve Nesbitt, voice of Mission Control, January 28,
                 1986, as the shuttle Challenger exploded within view
                 of the grandstands.

[U-Boot-Users] Request to mailing list U-Boot-Users rejected

[Wolfgang Denk]

In message <200712111453.00849.vapier@gentoo.org> you wrote:
> 
> > > Message body is too big: 40979 bytes with a limit of 40 KB
...
> it's an automated message ... it isnt like Wolfgang is sitting there a 
> rejecting each one

Oh, it *is* me. As a list moderator I have to NAK these manually.
But the way I see it I can only be fair by NAKing all such requests.
Even if the exceed the limit by just a single byte.

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
Living on Earth may be expensive, but it includes an annual free trip
around the Sun.

[U-Boot-Users] Request to mailing list U-Boot-Users rejected

[Mike Frysinger]

On Tuesday 11 December 2007, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> In message <200712112009.06587.sr@denx.de> you wrote:
> > > > Message body is too big: 40979 bytes with a limit of 40 KB
>
> ...
>
> > 100k limit, please.
>
> And what happens whith the next posting with a size of 100k + N bytes?

with that logic, why allow 40k.  take it down to 10k.  or 1k.

posting valid patches that exceed 40k is not uncommon.  patches exceeding 100k 
is much less uncommon.
-mike
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 827 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20071211/747e4d3c/attachment.pgp 

[U-Boot-Users] Request to mailing list U-Boot-Users rejected

[Mike Frysinger]

On Tuesday 11 December 2007, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Tuesday 11 December 2007, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> > In message <200712112009.06587.sr@denx.de> you wrote:
> > > > > Message body is too big: 40979 bytes with a limit of 40 KB
> >
> > ...
> >
> > > 100k limit, please.
> >
> > And what happens whith the next posting with a size of 100k + N bytes?
>
> with that logic, why allow 40k.  take it down to 10k.  or 1k.
>
> posting valid patches that exceed 40k is not uncommon.  patches exceeding
> 100k is much less uncommon.

actually, if you're NAK-ing this by yourself, then i dont see why you'ed NAK a 
valid patch in the first place.

someone posts a log file or configuration file or something that exceeds the 
limit makes sense.  people developing source code when patches are supposed 
to be sent to the list does not.
-mike
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 827 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20071211/6547d9f5/attachment.pgp 

[U-Boot-Users] Request to mailing list U-Boot-Users rejected

[Wolfgang Denk]

In message <200712111741.57017.vapier@gentoo.org> you wrote:
> 
> > And what happens whith the next posting with a size of 100k + N bytes?
> 
> with that logic, why allow 40k.  take it down to 10k.  or 1k.

40 kB is the default value.


Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
It is better to marry than to burn.
                                - Bible ``I Corinthians'' ch. 7, v. 9

[U-Boot-Users] Request to mailing list U-Boot-Users rejected

[Ben Warren]

Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> In message <200712111741.57017.vapier@gentoo.org> you wrote:
>   
>>> And what happens whith the next posting with a size of 100k + N bytes?
>>>       
>> with that logic, why allow 40k.  take it down to 10k.  or 1k.
>>     
>
> 40 kB is the default value.
>
>   
Powerful reasoning indeed. It reminds me of when I tell my little boy 
"because I say so"

regards,
Ben

[U-Boot-Users] Request to mailing list U-Boot-Users rejected

[Haavard Skinnemoen]

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 23:26:11 +0100
Wolfgang Denk <wd@denx.de> wrote:

> In message <200712111453.00849.vapier@gentoo.org> you wrote:
> >   
> > > > Message body is too big: 40979 bytes with a limit of 40 KB  
> ...
> > it's an automated message ... it isnt like Wolfgang is sitting there a 
> > rejecting each one  
> 
> Oh, it *is* me. As a list moderator I have to NAK these manually.
> But the way I see it I can only be fair by NAKing all such requests.
> Even if the exceed the limit by just a single byte.

Then why don't you set it up to NAK such messages unconditionally?

What really pissed me off this time is that it was so obvious that you
went in, looked at the message and rejected it explicitly even though
it was only slightly above the limit and I specifically said in the
introductory e-mail that this particular patch is hard to rebase.

Now, what do you want me to do? Shorten the log message? Remove some
comments?

Haavard

[U-Boot-Users] Request to mailing list U-Boot-Users rejected

[Timur Tabi]

Wolfgang Denk wrote:

> Oh, it *is* me. As a list moderator I have to NAK these manually.
> But the way I see it I can only be fair by NAKing all such requests.
> Even if the exceed the limit by just a single byte.

This policy isn't helping anyone, however.  It's making more work for you, 
because you spend more time NAK'ing patches.  It's more work for the people who 
contribute patches, because they need to find other ways to submit the patches.

No one is saying that the limit should be removed.  We're just saying that 40K 
is too low.  As far as I'm concerned, it has *always* been too low.  100K is 
reasonable.

-- 
Timur Tabi
Linux kernel developer at Freescale

[U-Boot-Users] Request to mailing list U-Boot-Users rejected

[Jerry Van Baren]

Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Tuesday 11 December 2007, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> On Tuesday 11 December 2007, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>>> In message <200712112009.06587.sr@denx.de> you wrote:
>>>>>> Message body is too big: 40979 bytes with a limit of 40 KB
>>> ...
>>>
>>>> 100k limit, please.
>>> And what happens whith the next posting with a size of 100k + N bytes?
>> with that logic, why allow 40k.  take it down to 10k.  or 1k.
>>
>> posting valid patches that exceed 40k is not uncommon.  patches exceeding
>> 100k is much less uncommon.
> 
> actually, if you're NAK-ing this by yourself, then i dont see why you'ed NAK a 
> valid patch in the first place.
> 
> someone posts a log file or configuration file or something that exceeds the 
> limit makes sense.  people developing source code when patches are supposed 
> to be sent to the list does not.
> -mike

I would agree with Mike... have a soft limit of 40K where bounced 
messages go to Wolfgang and he authorizes "reasonable" patches. 
Alternatively, set the limit higher (100K) and cut it back if it gets 
abused.  I suspect it won't.

I don't know how many "oversize" (>40K) messages Wolfgang sees.  Judging 
from the small number of complaints about oversize bounces on the list, 
it doesn't seem to be many.

Discarding oversize patches on a hard numerical criteria rather than on 
a softer validity criteria is easy for decision making but hard on the 
developers.  Arbitrarily breaking (in *both* senses of the word) patches 
just to fit them under the 40K limit causes more work and results in 
*less* benefit.

I like Koha's motto: "Every time a patch falls on the floor, a kitten 
dies." <http://wiki.koha.org/doku.php?id=en:development:git_usage>

We should be encouraging patches of a reasonable size and should be 
flexible on the definition of "reasonable."  We are willing to use 3rd 
party code (e.g. linux driver code) that may not quite meet our coding 
standards because it is useful and expedient to not have to rewrite 
perfectly good code.  If we have reasonable flexibility on coding 
standards, why not on patch sizes???

My 2 cents,
gvb

P.S. courtesy of Ogden Nash :-)

THE KITTEN
----------
The trouble with a kitten is
THAT
Eventually it becomes a
CAT.

[U-Boot-Users] Request to mailing list U-Boot-Users rejected

[Wolfgang Denk]

In message <20071212102901.524d3850@dhcp-252-066.norway.atmel.com> you wrote:
>
> Now, what do you want me to do? Shorten the log message? Remove some
> comments?

Quoting http://www.denx.de/wiki/UBoot/Patches :

	Remember that there is a size limit of 40 kB on the mailing
	list. In most cases, you did something wrong if your patch
	exceeds this limit. Think again if you should not split it
	into separate logical parts. If your patch, uncompressed,
	exceeds this limit, and you are absolutely sure that you
	should not split it, then provide a URL (link) pointing to
	your patch instead.

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
I wish Captain Vimes were here. He wouldn't have  known  what  to  do
either, but he's got a much better vocabulary to be baffled in.
                                 - Terry Pratchett, _Guards! Guards!_

[U-Boot-Users] Request to mailing list U-Boot-Users rejected

[Stefan Roese]

Hi Wolfgang,

On Thursday 13 December 2007, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> > Now, what do you want me to do? Shorten the log message? Remove some
> > comments?
>
> Quoting http://www.denx.de/wiki/UBoot/Patches :
>
> 	Remember that there is a size limit of 40 kB on the mailing
> 	list. In most cases, you did something wrong if your patch
> 	exceeds this limit. Think again if you should not split it
> 	into separate logical parts. If your patch, uncompressed,
> 	exceeds this limit, and you are absolutely sure that you
> 	should not split it, then provide a URL (link) pointing to
> 	your patch instead.

Don't you think after the feedback we got in this thread (all developers 
voting for 100k limit instead of 40k), that it would be good to change the 
limit?

Please reconsider. Thanks.

Best regards,
Stefan

=====================================================================
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: +49-8142-66989-0 Fax: +49-8142-66989-80  Email: office at denx.de
=====================================================================

[U-Boot-Users] Request to mailing list U-Boot-Users rejected

[Kumar Gala]

On Dec 13, 2007, at 12:16 AM, Stefan Roese wrote:

> Hi Wolfgang,
>
> On Thursday 13 December 2007, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>>> Now, what do you want me to do? Shorten the log message? Remove some
>>> comments?
>>
>> Quoting http://www.denx.de/wiki/UBoot/Patches :
>>
>> 	Remember that there is a size limit of 40 kB on the mailing
>> 	list. In most cases, you did something wrong if your patch
>> 	exceeds this limit. Think again if you should not split it
>> 	into separate logical parts. If your patch, uncompressed,
>> 	exceeds this limit, and you are absolutely sure that you
>> 	should not split it, then provide a URL (link) pointing to
>> 	your patch instead.
>
> Don't you think after the feedback we got in this thread (all  
> developers
> voting for 100k limit instead of 40k), that it would be good to  
> change the
> limit?
>
> Please reconsider. Thanks.
>
> Best regards,
> Stefan

Just to add my two cents, I believe the linuxppc-dev lists is set to  
100k and we don't seem to have much issue w/it at that limit.

- k

[U-Boot-Users] Request to mailing list U-Boot-Users rejected

[ksi at koi8.net]

On Thu, 13 Dec 2007, Kumar Gala wrote:

>
> On Dec 13, 2007, at 12:16 AM, Stefan Roese wrote:
>
>> Hi Wolfgang,
>>
>> On Thursday 13 December 2007, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>>>> Now, what do you want me to do? Shorten the log message? Remove some
>>>> comments?
>>>
>>> Quoting http://www.denx.de/wiki/UBoot/Patches :
>>>
>>> 	Remember that there is a size limit of 40 kB on the mailing
>>> 	list. In most cases, you did something wrong if your patch
>>> 	exceeds this limit. Think again if you should not split it
>>> 	into separate logical parts. If your patch, uncompressed,
>>> 	exceeds this limit, and you are absolutely sure that you
>>> 	should not split it, then provide a URL (link) pointing to
>>> 	your patch instead.
>>
>> Don't you think after the feedback we got in this thread (all
>> developers
>> voting for 100k limit instead of 40k), that it would be good to
>> change the
>> limit?
>>
>> Please reconsider. Thanks.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Stefan
>
> Just to add my two cents, I believe the linuxppc-dev lists is set to
> 100k and we don't seem to have much issue w/it at that limit.
>
> - k

I also vote for 100K. That should be enough for everyone (c) B.Gates :)

---
******************************************************************
*  KSI at home    KOI8 Net  < >  The impossible we do immediately.  *
*  Las Vegas   NV, USA   < >  Miracles require 24-hour notice.   *
******************************************************************

[U-Boot-Users] Request to mailing list U-Boot-Users rejected

[Robert Schwebel]

On Thu, Dec 13, 2007 at 12:27:28AM -0600, Kumar Gala wrote:
> Just to add my two cents, I believe the linuxppc-dev lists is set to
> 100k and we don't seem to have much issue w/it at that limit.

The 40k limit comes from an age where we all have been connected to the
rest of the world with 64k lines; although I'm deeply against
encouraging people to send around multi megabyte office documents, 100k
sounds like a pretty good compromise for lists containing patches.

rsc
-- 
 Dipl.-Ing. Robert Schwebel | http://www.pengutronix.de
 Pengutronix - Linux Solutions for Science and Industry
   Handelsregister:  Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686
     Hannoversche Str. 2, 31134 Hildesheim, Germany
   Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |  Fax: +49-5121-206917-9