Re: Fixing 2.6.0's broken documentation references

[Michael Still]

On Sat, 27 Dec 2003, Thomas Molina wrote:

> I agree that having a documentation maintainer would be a good idea.  Hans 
> could volunteer or I could if no one else wants it.  Whoever does it 
> though, needs some assurance that patches won't be dropped on the floor.

I would think that any such maintainer would also have to deal with 
kernel-doc, and making sure all of those scripts work / don't produce 
errors. I got a bunch of patches into the late 2.5 cycle to deal with 
that, but someone needs to keep that stuff working.

I'm happy to keep playing with those scripts, if other people are happy 
with that.

My point is that documentation is more complex than just keeping the 
comments in the source pointing at the right places -- there is a bunch of 
infrastructure there as well.

On the dropped patch front, I had a lot of success getting patches into 
the kernel via the Trivial Patch Monkey. Given the menial nature of this 
sort of work, wouldn't this best be done by the janitors and sending 
patches to trivial?

Cheers,
Mikal

-- 

Michael Still (mikal@xxxxxxxxxxx) | "All my life I've had one dream,
http://www.stillhq.com            |  to achieve my many goals"
UTC + 11                          |    -- Homer Simpson

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/