>>>> but will reject the others, not just this driver but all of them >>>> that are currently pending in our patchwork (https://patchwork.linuxtv.org). I find it very surprising that you rejected 146 useful update suggestions so easily. >>>> Feel free to repost, but only if you organize the patch as either fixing >>>> the same type of issue for a whole subdirectory (media/usb, media/pci, etc) >> >> Just for the record, while this may work for media, it won't work for all >> subsystems. One will quickly get a complaint that the big patch needs to >> go into multiple trees. > > For the record: this only applies to drivers/media. What does this software area make it so special in comparison to other Linux subsystems? > We discussed what do to with series like this during our media summit > last Friday and this was the conclusion of that. * Have you taken any other solution approaches into account than a quick “rejection”? * Could your reaction have been different if the remarkable number of change possibilities were sent by different authors (and not only me)? * How should possibly remaining disagreements about affected implementation details be resolved now? * Are you looking for further improvements around development tools like “patchwork” and “quilt”? * Will you accept increasing risks because of bigger patch sizes? >>>> or fixing all issues for a single driver. >>> >>> I find that I did this already. * Can such an information lead to differences in the preferred patch granularity? * How do you think about this detail? >>>> Actual bug fixes (like the null pointer patch in this series) can still be posted as >>>> separate patches, but cleanups shouldn't. >>> >>> I got an other software development opinion. How would you ever like to clean up stuff in affected source files which was accumulated (or preserved somehow) over years? >>>> Just so you know, I'll reject any future patch series that do not follow these rules. I guess that this handling will trigger more communication challenges. >>>> Just use common sense when posting these things in the future. Our “common sense” seems to be occasionally different in significant ways. >>>> I would also suggest that your time might be spent more productively >>>> if you would work on some more useful projects. I distribute my software development capacity over several areas. Does your wording indicate a questionable signal for further contributions? 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
