On 14-04-08 22:38, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 21:13:41 +0200
Rene Herman <rene.herman@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Does that mean you're not going to take patches that align the right end of
lines in comments? :-(
erm, was that ":-(" supposed to be a ":-)"?
The ":-(" was supposed to add to the implicitly obvious ":-)". That is, was
indeed joking (Al mentioned them) but with a slightly serious undertone:
I don't like to merge patches which fix typos and spellos and grammaros
in comments, simply because I'd be buried in the things. I do take such
fixes for user-visible text (Documentation/, kerneldoc comments and
printks).
Right-justification of comments would fall rather a long way below
spelling fixes.
You, particularly, seem to be very good at picking up trivia. I've posted
completely trivial patches from time to time for small things I encounter
while looking at something else. Things at the "are people going to look
funny at me for even bothering or..." level but you picking them up means
it's still useful to post, so I sometimes do.
Now, in fact, Linux as a _whole_ doesn't seem bad at accepting that kind of
small janitorial stuff but I have been noticing some backlash to it as well.
I'm not sure it's worse or better than historically, but the "checkpatch
syndrome" certainly triggers more of it.
Al specifically wanted more new eyes but the way to reward those new eyes is
accepting their small changes. Al also specifically doesn't like those small
changes when at the level of the automated and semi-brainless checkpatch level.
I believe the janitorial work has been over-organized, both through the
kernel-janitors and checkpatch since while these are very useful in guiding
a newbie in _what_ to do they cause "automated" huge tree-wide trivia storms
which people then don't react overly favourable to and the new eyes who did
all that work of generating it all dim again...
Frankly, the kernel really is fairly complex these days when starting at 0.
Much more complex certainly than, say, back in 2.0 or 2.2 days and while
Al's scenario of per-subsystem reviews might be good, I don't believe it's
very realistic. Companies don't pay to have those done and for newbies it's
generally too complex since understanding most parts of the kernel fully,
requires understanding most of the rest kernel rather well also.
So you get the really promising newbies? Yeah, that, or you don't get anyone
and if some promising newbies are building up 137 part checkpatch inspired
patchsets that don't help none.
So, what am I saying (what _am_ I saying?!?) ...
I seemed to observe somewhat of an internal contradiction in Al's message
about new eyes and his dislike of the trivial stuff but the contradiction
only exists if the dislike wouldn't be limited to these kinds of huge trivia
storms. I believe it is, and I furthermore believe that yes, it's
over-organization that causes many new eyes to focus on the brainless aspects.
Now, do those new eyes have many other options when very few (to none) of
the core crowd ever does things like answer question on the kernelnewbies
list? From the established names, I only remember ever seeing Greg KH and
Adrian Bunk there. And I'm _still_ pissed that noone would or could tell me
what was wrong with the legacy CD-ROM driver I and Pekka Enberg were toying
around with a while ago. Frankly, I care a whole lot less about a hundred
sparse warning fixes.
In short -- the kernel in it's current state is already quite complex and if
new eyes are wanted they'll need to be coached more. I'm seeing very little
of that.
Rene.
--
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
