On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 5:00 PM Randy Dunlap <rdunlap(a)infradead.org> wrote:
On 9/13/19 4:48 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
>> So I'm expecting to take this kind of stuff into Documentation/. My own
>> personal hope is that it can maybe serve to shame some of these "local
>> quirks" out of existence. The evidence from this brief discussion
>> that this might indeed happen.
> I don't think it's shaming, I think it's validating. Everyone just
> insists that since it's written in the Book of Rules then it's our fault
> for not reading it. It's like those EULA things where there is more
> text than anyone can physically read in a life time.
> And the documentation doesn't help. For example, I knew people's rules
> about capitalizing the subject but I'd just forget. I say that if you
> can't be bothered to add it to checkpatch then it means you don't really
> care that strongly.
If a subsystem requires a certain spelling/capitalization in patch email
subjects, it should be added to MAINTAINERS IMO. E.g.,
Oh, I understood the question differently. I thought it was about
"sub: system: Fix foo" vs. "sub: system: fix foo".
For simple and trivial things, I tend to make changes while applying, as that's
usually less work than complaining, and verifying that it's been fixed in the
next (if any) version n days/weeks/months later.
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert(a)linux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like
-- Linus Torvalds