Re: [PATCH] component: Add documentation

2019-02-06 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki
On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 5:47 PM Daniel Vetter wrote: > > While typing these I think doing an s/component_master/aggregate/ > would be useful: > - it's shorter :-) > - I think component/aggregate is much more meaningful naming than > component/puppetmaster or something like that. At least to my >

[PATCH] component: Add documentation

2019-02-06 Thread Daniel Vetter
While typing these I think doing an s/component_master/aggregate/ would be useful: - it's shorter :-) - I think component/aggregate is much more meaningful naming than component/puppetmaster or something like that. At least to my English ear "aggregate" emphasizes much more the "assemble a

Re: [PATCH] component: Add documentation

2019-02-05 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Tue, Feb 05, 2019 at 04:49:02PM +, Russell King - ARM Linux admin wrote: > On Tue, Feb 05, 2019 at 05:21:07PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > Someone owes me a beer ... > > I find that deeply offensive - it is clearly directed at me personally > as author of the component helper. > >

Re: [PATCH] component: Add documentation

2019-02-05 Thread Russell King - ARM Linux admin
On Tue, Feb 05, 2019 at 05:21:07PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > Someone owes me a beer ... I find that deeply offensive - it is clearly directed at me personally as author of the component helper. There are double-standards in the kernel ecosystem with respect to documentation - there are

[PATCH] component: Add documentation

2019-02-05 Thread Daniel Vetter
Someone owes me a beer ... While typing these I think doing an s/component_master/aggregate/ would be useful: - it's shorter :-) - I think component/aggregate is much more meaningful naming than component/puppetmaster or something like that. At least to my English ear "aggregate" emphasizes