On Mon, 2013-11-25 at 11:18 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Joe Perches <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Tue, 2013-11-19 at 10:24 -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > > > I'll take a proper cleanup, > > > but just whitespace... just pointless churn. > > What in your view would be "a proper cleanup" for a20.c? > > If a newbie does a meaningful, complete, well done cleanup patch then > congratulations and any such help is welcome. > > If you as a more experienced kernel developer do a cleanup as part of > some real work then sure, all such cleanups are welcome and they are a > natural part of development work. > > So a standalone cleanup patch to a20.c from _you_ would probably not > qualify, almost by definition: your first patch was applied 7 years > ago,
More than 10, but I only note that by looking in a mirror. > you are by far not a newbie anymore, yet you seem to be mostly > stuck on the 'cleanups and trivialities' level! Sheesh! > > My message to the buerocrat Joe Perches is: please leave trivial and > printk patches to newbies, you need to raise to the next level of > kernel development already. Were I employed to improve the kernel, I'd probably subsume my neatening tendencies to the needs of the employer. Thankfully, I'm not employed to improve Linux and I can choose what I want to do without need to fix bugs that cause entities to lose money, customers or profit. Nor do I have to add hardware support for whatever new gadget comes along. > FYI, Linux is a meritocracy, not a bureaucracy: I don't believe that Linux is a meritocracy at all. It has become a business entity all to itself and is nearly completely supported and maintained by profit-seeking ventures such as the one that employs you. Is any major maintainer an unpaid, unremunerated volunteer? > creating self-serving > churn and attention-seeking I think you've a odd view of what I submit. I've a hard time believing I'm either self-serving or attention-seeking. I'll advance my belief that I'm rather unassuming and not prone to spotlights. If I see what I believe a defect in either logic or style, I either comment on it if it's a patch, or submit a patch myself. I provide comments a fair amount. > but unimportant patches is not the way to > gain kernel development credibility long term, and eventually people > start protecting against your increasing abuse of the development > process. Do please reread of this thread as what I did was comment on a particular patch by Johannes and suggested that it was not likely a necessary thing to change. What I tried to help him with was understanding what, if anything, actually needed to be or could be changed in the file. > IMHO. <smile> Perhaps you could dial down your humility a bit. Perhaps you'll reread and see if it seems humble to you. cheers, Joe -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
