On Tue, May 13, 2025 at 09:33:34PM +0300, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> On Tue, May 13, 2025 at 05:12:49AM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > On Mon, May 12, 2025 at 07:08:53PM +0300, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> >
> > > I split them like referendum ballots to see where the consensus at and
> > > not have big single discussion thread.
> >
> > Just in case - consensus would look like a lot of replies in support and not
> > simply the lack of replies, right?
>
> Well, it is l-k, so absence of NAKs counts as OK.
In your reality - perhaps...
BTW, somebody ought to inject a bit of reality into the ridiculous wikipedia
page on LKML. Starting with
* a lot of developers are not and had not been subscribed to it
for decades. That includes Linus, among other people.
* those of us who still are subscribed to it have to choose between
reading through literally thousands of postings and dropping most of them
unread.
* an l-k posting not Cc'd to saner lists and/or specific people
is quite likely to be missed.
So absense of NAKs on l-k may or may not count as "OK" from your point of
view, but it does not mean that there is any kind of consensus.
More to the point, if your... suggestions would go into D/CodingStyle,
replying to objections along the lines of "where the hell has that come
from and when have I agreed to that?" with "why haven't you replied
when I posted them to l-k?" is *NOT* likely to be well-received.
