Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > I'm very sorry to have caused so much pain. Yes, I can imagine how > terrible it must be to review several iterations of a simple > documentation patch. Thank you for being so patient with me so far- I > understand if you don't want to do this anymore. > > I do spend time proofreading patches before sending them out, but I'm > clearly not very good at it. In future, I'll either try rewriting > entire paragraphs or simply refrain from writing documentation patches. I do not think that is the lesson you should learn from this exchange. A major part of Michael's complaint (which I think was justified) was that he even made a suggestion that is ready to be cut-and-pasted, but your reroll does not use the suggested phrasing _without_ explaining why it doesn't. It is not limited to "documentation patches". If you get a "how about doing it this way---isn't it cleaner?" suggestion to your code patch, you at least owe either "yeah, that looks better---thanks, I've used it in this reroll" or "no, because...; I've used the original" to the person who tried to help you, no? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html