On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 10:53:23AM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> Gee...a response from a two-year-old thread...
You know how we love to document stuff, right? :-)
> it's taking me a while to page all of that back in :)
Here's the gist of your concern:
On Thu, 17 Dec 2020 16:05:37 +0100
Borislav Petkov wrote:
> So, that thing.
>
> I have this ontop of 5.10 along with most comments integrated.
>
> Now, I'm thinking if I start sending those pieces which belong into the
> main process documentation, the bikeshedding that is going to ensue is
>
On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 04:49:04PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > Suppose I came along with my nifty new architecture, and it dragged in a
> > whole new set of timer and interrupt subsystems that duplicated a lot of
> > what's in the kernel now, but buried a few "local quirks" deep in the
> >
On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 09:32:18AM -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 8:32 AM Mark Brown wrote:
> > I'm not 100% sure that people will pick up that the topic is about a
> > handbook for working with maintainers rather than a handbook for being a
> > maintainer from that title...
On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 09:32:18AM -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 8:32 AM Mark Brown wrote:
> > I'm not 100% sure that people will pick up that the topic is about a
> > handbook for working with maintainers rather than a handbook for being a
> > maintainer from that title...
* Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> > Even after a decade of introducing Git I still see Signed-off-by used as
> > an Acked-by or Reviewed-by substitutes, so I'd suggest adding this small
> > explanation as well:
> >
> > + SOB chains should reflect the *real* route a patch took as it was
> >
* Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> > Even after a decade of introducing Git I still see Signed-off-by used as
> > an Acked-by or Reviewed-by substitutes, so I'd suggest adding this small
> > explanation as well:
> >
> > + SOB chains should reflect the *real* route a patch took as it was
> >
On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 09:33:47AM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
>
> > I thought there was a slot already scheduled on the refereed track,
> > "Towards a Linux Kernel Mainainer Handbook" (Tuesday at 4:45pm) for
> > this purpose?
>
> My expectation is that this will be an actual talk; it seemed
On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 09:33:47AM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
>
> > I thought there was a slot already scheduled on the refereed track,
> > "Towards a Linux Kernel Mainainer Handbook" (Tuesday at 4:45pm) for
> > this purpose?
>
> My expectation is that this will be an actual talk; it seemed
On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 8:32 AM Mark Brown wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 11:21:33AM -0500, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 04:05:17PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > > My plumbers schedule is already 100% booked with MCs and other things.
> > > There is no kernel-summit
On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 8:32 AM Mark Brown wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 11:21:33AM -0500, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 04:05:17PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > > My plumbers schedule is already 100% booked with MCs and other things.
> > > There is no kernel-summit
On Thu, 8 Nov 2018 11:21:33 -0500
"Theodore Y. Ts'o" wrote:
> I thought there was a slot already scheduled on the refereed track,
> "Towards a Linux Kernel Mainainer Handbook" (Tuesday at 4:45pm) for
> this purpose?
My expectation is that this will be an actual talk; it seemed rude to
assume
On Thu, 8 Nov 2018 11:21:33 -0500
"Theodore Y. Ts'o" wrote:
> I thought there was a slot already scheduled on the refereed track,
> "Towards a Linux Kernel Mainainer Handbook" (Tuesday at 4:45pm) for
> this purpose?
My expectation is that this will be an actual talk; it seemed rude to
assume
On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 11:21:33AM -0500, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 04:05:17PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > My plumbers schedule is already 100% booked with MCs and other things.
> > There is no kernel-summit schedule details available as of yet, but it
> > is already
On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 11:21:33AM -0500, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 04:05:17PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > My plumbers schedule is already 100% booked with MCs and other things.
> > There is no kernel-summit schedule details available as of yet, but it
> > is already
On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 04:05:17PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 07:49:20AM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> > Might it be worth asking Ted for a kernel summit slot to talk about this
> > next week?
>
> Ah, on that, let me complain :-)
>
> My plumbers schedule is already
On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 04:05:17PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 07:49:20AM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> > Might it be worth asking Ted for a kernel summit slot to talk about this
> > next week?
>
> Ah, on that, let me complain :-)
>
> My plumbers schedule is already
On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 08:19:57AM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Nov 2018 16:05:17 +0100
> Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 07:49:20AM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> > > Might it be worth asking Ted for a kernel summit slot to talk about this
> > > next week?
>
On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 08:19:57AM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Nov 2018 16:05:17 +0100
> Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 07:49:20AM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> > > Might it be worth asking Ted for a kernel summit slot to talk about this
> > > next week?
>
Jon,
On Thu, 8 Nov 2018, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Nov 2018 21:51:38 +0100 (CET)
> Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > + SOB chains should reflect the *real* route a patch took as it was
> > + propagated to us, with the first SOB entry signalling primary
> > + authorship of a single
Jon,
On Thu, 8 Nov 2018, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Nov 2018 21:51:38 +0100 (CET)
> Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > + SOB chains should reflect the *real* route a patch took as it was
> > + propagated to us, with the first SOB entry signalling primary
> > + authorship of a single
On Thu, 8 Nov 2018 16:05:17 +0100
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 07:49:20AM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> > Might it be worth asking Ted for a kernel summit slot to talk about this
> > next week?
>
> Ah, on that, let me complain :-)
>
> My plumbers schedule is already 100%
On Thu, 8 Nov 2018 16:05:17 +0100
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 07:49:20AM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> > Might it be worth asking Ted for a kernel summit slot to talk about this
> > next week?
>
> Ah, on that, let me complain :-)
>
> My plumbers schedule is already 100%
On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 07:49:20AM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> Might it be worth asking Ted for a kernel summit slot to talk about this
> next week?
Ah, on that, let me complain :-)
My plumbers schedule is already 100% booked with MCs and other things.
There is no kernel-summit schedule
On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 07:49:20AM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> Might it be worth asking Ted for a kernel summit slot to talk about this
> next week?
Ah, on that, let me complain :-)
My plumbers schedule is already 100% booked with MCs and other things.
There is no kernel-summit schedule
On Wed, 7 Nov 2018 21:51:38 +0100 (CET)
Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> So I agree with Dan, that we should collect as much documentation from
> subsystems/maintainers and get it into the tree so we can:
>
>- give contributors immediate access to subsystem/maintainer specific
> quirks
>
>
On Wed, 7 Nov 2018 21:51:38 +0100 (CET)
Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> So I agree with Dan, that we should collect as much documentation from
> subsystems/maintainers and get it into the tree so we can:
>
>- give contributors immediate access to subsystem/maintainer specific
> quirks
>
>
Dan,
On Wed, 7 Nov 2018, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 11:49 AM Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> > The stuff that is truly specific to tip seems fairly minimal:
> >
> > - what goes into tip
> > - the reverse fir tree thing
> > - tail comments, or the distaste thereabouts
> > -
Dan,
On Wed, 7 Nov 2018, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 11:49 AM Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> > The stuff that is truly specific to tip seems fairly minimal:
> >
> > - what goes into tip
> > - the reverse fir tree thing
> > - tail comments, or the distaste thereabouts
> > -
On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 11:49 AM Jonathan Corbet wrote:
>
> On Wed, 07 Nov 2018 18:10:10 +0100
> Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
> > Mark recently suggested in one of the ksummit discussions to add subsystem
> > or tree specific maintainer handbooks to document subsystem/tree specific
> > development
On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 11:49 AM Jonathan Corbet wrote:
>
> On Wed, 07 Nov 2018 18:10:10 +0100
> Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
> > Mark recently suggested in one of the ksummit discussions to add subsystem
> > or tree specific maintainer handbooks to document subsystem/tree specific
> > development
On Wed, 07 Nov 2018 18:10:10 +0100
Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Mark recently suggested in one of the ksummit discussions to add subsystem
> or tree specific maintainer handbooks to document subsystem/tree specific
> development process information.
>
> The following series adds the general section
On Wed, 07 Nov 2018 18:10:10 +0100
Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Mark recently suggested in one of the ksummit discussions to add subsystem
> or tree specific maintainer handbooks to document subsystem/tree specific
> development process information.
>
> The following series adds the general section
Mark recently suggested in one of the ksummit discussions to add subsystem
or tree specific maintainer handbooks to document subsystem/tree specific
development process information.
The following series adds the general section and the tip tree specific
handbook.
Thanks,
tglx
Mark recently suggested in one of the ksummit discussions to add subsystem
or tree specific maintainer handbooks to document subsystem/tree specific
development process information.
The following series adds the general section and the tip tree specific
handbook.
Thanks,
tglx
35 matches
Mail list logo
