By conformant I mean for example that it has to compile or if the
patch consists of a series of patches each patch applied individually
should compile. That is a lot of work for something that is just being
presented to ask for an opinion.
On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 12:28 AM, Greg KH <g...@kroah.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 03:48:52PM -0700, Joe Smith wrote:
>> Thanks, Greg and Valdis.
>> An RFC patch by definition is not intended for submission. In cases
>> where the design is involved and the developer needs early input, why
>> go through all the hassle. The community could say I do not like it
>> and the whole effort would be useless. Once there is agreement then I
>> can see the need for all patches to be conformant.
> What do you mean exactly by "conformant"? Why would you not write
> "conformant" patches to start with? You don't want to have to do double
> the work by writing code in the wrong style first, and then having to go
> back and rewrite it.
> Anyway, be careful about RFC patches, you want to make it as easy as
> possible for others to review your work, so don't give anyone an excuse
> to _not_ read it.
> greg k-h
Kernelnewbies mailing list