> Developer reputation matters for somewhat controversial > patches being applied as well as non-controversial and > obviously correct patches being ignored. I am aware that there are more factors involved. > Your reputation means most all of your patches fall into > the latter category. I hope that this situation will evolve into directions which you would prefer more. > You have produced many trivial patches This is true. I started my concrete contributions to Linux software modules with simple source code search patterns. > that have caused new defects. A few unwanted programming mistakes just happened somehow. > That is simply unacceptable. Glitches are not desired as usual. > Especially when you don't immediately fix the problems you cause. I find my response times reasonable to some degree so far. Remaining open issues can be clarified by a corresponding constructive development dialogue, can't they? > If you would stop producing the trivial and instead > channel your efforts into actual bug fixing and logic > corrections and not just style modifications with no > code impact, your patch acceptance rate would increase. I find your conclusion appropriate. But I will come along source code places where I am going to update details which are also trivial. > I have given you many suggestions for actual structural > improvements to kernel code. I have got an other impression. There were a few occasions where advanced change possibilities were proposed. > You have ignored _all_ of them and I am unlikely to try > to interact with you any longer until your wheat:chaff > ratio changes. Can the efforts for deleting questionable error messages around Linux memory allocation functions improve this situation? 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
