> Your updates were not improvements. I find your view interesting. Do you refer to a specific wording suggestion here? https://lore.kernel.org/linux-spi/26028f50-3fb8-eb08-3c9f-08ada018bf9e@xxxxxx/ https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/6/2/210 You pointed another programming alternative out. https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/comment/1447149/ https://lore.kernel.org/linux-spi/20200602095411.GB5684@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > The formatting was worse Do you prefer an other quotation style for function names? > and to my native speaker eyes the grammar was worse. I am curious if a more pleasing wording variant will be found. > With this sort of stylistic thing it's especially important > that any review aligns with the needs and practices of the subsystem, Such an expectation is reasonable to some degree. > there is opinion in there and multiple opinions just makes things harder > for submitters. Do any of such views deviate from the Linux development documentation? Regards, Markus
