On 10/25/23 14:14, NeilBrown wrote: > On Wed, 25 Oct 2023, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: >> Hi Neil, >> >> On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 11:29 PM NeilBrown <neilb@xxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On Wed, 25 Oct 2023, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>> On 23/10/2023 20:49, Andrew Morton wrote: >>>>> On Thu, 19 Oct 2023 07:11:36 +0300 Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>>> Yesterday someone on my lists just sent an email looking for kernel >>>>>> tasks. >>>>> >>>>> Well here's a task: write a bot which follows the mailing lists and >>>>> sends people nastygrams if one of their emails is more than 95%(?) >>>>> quoted text. >>>>> >>>>> It's happening significantly more lately. Possibly because the gmail >>>>> client helpfully hides quoted text. >>>> >>>> I would also point to reviewers and maintainers who give a Rb/Ack tag: >>>> 1. somewhere at the top, without any footer like Best regards, and then >>>> quote entire patch, so I don't know shall I look for more comments after >>>> Rb/Ack? >>>> >>>> 2. quote entire email and then add Rb/Ack, so I need to figure out >>>> whether there was something between the hundreds of lines of text or not. >>> >>> Here we all are, brilliantly talented computer programmers who spend >>> our days making amazing fast digital devices do amazingly clever and >>> subtle things, inventing time-saving tools and processing vast amounts >>> of data without blinking, but for some reason we think the task of >>> skipping over a few thousand lines that all start with '> " is too hard >>> for us and that we should, in stead, complain to some other human to >>> convince them to make our life easier for us. >>> >>> Does anyone else see the irony? >> >> Please compare the numbers: >> 1. 1 sender removes irrelevant parts, >> 2. N receivers skip irrelevant parts. > > That is one way to look at the numbers. > Another is: > > 12 - fix about a dozen MUAs to summaries quotes properly > 12000 - fix an unknownable number of people to quote just exactly the > amount that their particular audience is going to want > > and when it comes to fixing-code versus fixing-people, I know which this > community is better at. > > I guess there is also the option > > 1 - fix vger.kernel.org to reject postings from people who don't > think and quote like "us", because we already have too many > contributor and want to block the heretics > > This is really just a form of the "platform problem" which lwn.net has > occasionally written about. The "problem" is that we treat the platform > (library code or other infrastructure) as fixed and develop ugly hacks > in our own code to work around some shortcoming, rather the going into > the platform and fixing it once for everyone there. The problem AFAICT is that many (most?) of us expect a certain level of etiquette but we are not seeing it in some posts. -- ~Randy
