From: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Do some wordsmithing and copy editing on the maintainer-entry-profile profile (template, guide): - fix punctuation - fix some wording - use "-rc" consistently Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx> Cc: linux-nvdimm@xxxxxxxxxxxx Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@xxxxxxx> Cc: linux-doc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx --- Documentation/maintainer/maintainer-entry-profile.rst | 12 +++++----- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) --- linux-next-20200526.orig/Documentation/maintainer/maintainer-entry-profile.rst +++ linux-next-20200526/Documentation/maintainer/maintainer-entry-profile.rst @@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ The Maintainer Entry Profile supplements (submitting-patches, submitting drivers...) with subsystem/device-driver-local customs as well as details about the patch submission life-cycle. A contributor uses this document to level set -their expectations and avoid common mistakes, maintainers may use these +their expectations and avoid common mistakes; maintainers may use these profiles to look across subsystems for opportunities to converge on common practices. @@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ Example questions to consider: - Does the subsystem have a patchwork instance? Are patchwork state changes notified? - Any bots or CI infrastructure that watches the list, or automated - testing feedback that the subsystem gates acceptance? + testing feedback that the subsystem uses to gate acceptance? - Git branches that are pulled into -next? - What branch should contributors submit against? - Links to any other Maintainer Entry Profiles? For example a @@ -54,8 +54,8 @@ One of the common misunderstandings of s sent at any time before the merge window closes and can still be considered for the next -rc1. The reality is that most patches need to be settled in soaking in linux-next in advance of the merge window -opening. Clarify for the submitter the key dates (in terms rc release -week) that patches might considered for merging and when patches need to +opening. Clarify for the submitter the key dates (in terms of -rc release +week) that patches might be considered for merging and when patches need to wait for the next -rc. At a minimum: - Last -rc for new feature submissions: @@ -70,8 +70,8 @@ wait for the next -rc. At a minimum: - Last -rc to merge features: Deadline for merge decisions Indicate to contributors the point at which an as yet un-applied patch set will need to wait for the NEXT+1 merge window. Of course there is no - obligation to ever except any given patchset, but if the review has not - concluded by this point the expectation the contributor should wait and + obligation to ever accept any given patchset, but if the review has not + concluded by this point the expectation is the contributor should wait and resubmit for the following merge window. Optional:
