Re: [PATCH] README: cosmetic fixes
From: Diego Viola
Date: Mon Jan 18 2016 - 20:32:28 EST
On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 8:40 PM, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 17:53:02 -0200
> Diego Viola <diego.viola@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> The thing I'm unsure about is that the pull request contained trivial
>> changes from others as well, and my patch was trivial, yes.
>> So why not include my changes with the other trivial changes as well?
> I set aside when I raised my initial complaint, and it stayed set aside.
After your complaint, I provided and suggested examples about
improving the section in the README that you complained about, I also
asked for your feedback, but you remained silent.
I was hoping to get your feedback and we would improve that section together.
> I'll consider it again, but I'm not very enthusiastic about applying
> stylistic fixes. We really don't need trivial patch wars over how many
> exclamation points belong on a given sentence.
I understand, but the exclamation point is just one fix, there are
other fixes in my patch.
> Diego, I'd like to ask you to sit back a bit and think about what you are
> really trying to accomplish. Maintainers are busy people, and you place a
> demand on their time whenever you post a patch. That time is available in
> *very* limited quantities for patches that don't really make the kernel
> better. Please think a bit about why you're doing this, and how you might
> direct your energy toward creating changes that maintainers actively want
> to apply. That will leave everybody better off than nagging people about
> cosmetic changes.
I'm just trying to improve the documentation, I want to improve the
state of the documentation and the README, why is this so hard to do?
I understand you don't have the time to review small patches like
mine, so wouldn't it make sense to delegate this work or activity to
someone else that has the time?