>> 1. I suggest to combine a few functions into fewer ones. >> * Do you spot any programming mistakes in these concrete cases? > > Not in the patches I skimmed. Thanks for such feedback. > However, your history of breaking code tells me that there have been mistakes > missed in the past. I admit that I had my own share of software development hiccups. I would also like to reduce them. But a probability remains that I will stumble on various glitches as usual. > As such, I'm not willing to take untested code from you that does not change > functionality at the risk of breaking something that is currently working. I imagine that the shown software refactoring will improve the affected sequence outputs in useful ways, won't it? > This is non-negotiable. It seems that we have got different views around the ways to get to acceptable final system test results. > As I said before, if you test it, I'll consider it. I got a few doubts for this information. If you find my software development reputation so questionable, I assume that you would not trust any tests that I would try out on my own. > If you are unwilling to test your changes, I'm unwilling to apply them. I guess that the desired willingness will depend on a test environment which will be trusted by all involved parties. Other incentives might also matter. > I'm not interested in double checking all of your work, and fixing your bugs > for no functional benefit. Do you care for improvements in the implementation of logging functions? > I find less value in these patches if they're from someone seemingly > trying to rack up patch count. I am picking special source code search patterns up. The evolving development tools can point then hundreds of source files out which contain similar update candidates. I found also a few spelling weaknesses while I was looking around in affected source code. These tools can also increase the awareness for such change possibilities, can't they? Regards, Markus -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
