On 24.02.22 10:56, Alexander Dahl wrote: > Hello Thorsten, > > Am Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 09:19:24AM +0100 schrieb Thorsten Leemhuis: >> On 24.02.22 01:14, Kees Cook wrote: >>> +If you are a first time contributor it is recommended that the patch >>> +itself be vetted by others privately before being posted to public lists. >>> +(This is required if you have been explicitly told your patches need >>> +more careful internal review.) These people are expected to have their >>> +"Reviewed-by" tag included in the resulting patch. Finding another >>> +developer familiar with Linux contribution, especially within your own >>> +organization, and having them help with reviews before sending them to >>> +the public mailing lists tends to significantly improve the quality of the >>> +resulting patches, and there by reduces the burden on other developers. >> >> I like the section, but I wonder why it's needed here. Is there anything >> specific to patches produced from research in it there I missed when >> reading it? If not: Wouldn't it be better to include that section as a >> TLDR in Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst and point there >> instead? We already have at least two places describing how to submit >> patches, creating yet another one (even if it's just in such a brief >> version) somehow feels slightly wrong to me. >> >> OTOH I fully understand that having things in one place has it's >> benefits. If that's wanted, why not put that text as TLDR in >> submitting-patches.rst and maintain a copy here? Sure, keeping things in >> sync has downsides, but I'd say it's the lesser evil. A copy could also >> be avoided by briefly mentioning some of the important bits found in >> another document; that's the approach I took in my patches regarding >> regressions. To quote: > > Without further opinion on the topic or content itself: > If there's need to have "copied" parts of the documentation available > in different places, why not put that to a separate file and include > it in all places which need it? [...] Yeah, I already wondered if that's possible, but never actually investigated, as I assume the "separate file" aspect you mentioned is a show-stopper: it makes reading hard for everyone that looks at the rst files directly -- and that's something we afaics want to support. Ciao, Thorsten
