On 27/07/07, Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:From: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx>
Add text on using relevant mailing lists.
I'd add a little bit to that - see below
Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
MAINTAINERS | 13 ++++++++-----
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
--- linux-2623-rc1g2.orig/MAINTAINERS
+++ linux-2623-rc1g2/MAINTAINERS
@@ -23,15 +23,18 @@ trivial patch so apply some common sense
4. When you are happy with a change make it generally available for
testing and await feedback.
-5. Make a patch available to the relevant maintainer in the list. Use
- 'diff -u' to make the patch easy to merge. Be prepared to get your
- changes sent back with seemingly silly requests about formatting
- and variable names. These aren't as silly as they seem. One
- job the maintainers (and especially Linus) do is to keep things
+5. Make a patch available to the relevant maintainer(s) and mailing
+ list(s). Use 'diff -u' to make the patch easy to merge. Be prepared
+ to get your changes sent back with seemingly silly requests about
+ formatting and variable names. These aren't as silly as they seem.
+ One job the maintainers (and especially Linus) do is to keep things
looking the same. Sometimes this means that the clever hack in
your driver to get around a problem actually needs to become a
generalized kernel feature ready for next time.
+ Use the relevant mailing list(s) -- don't just send everything to
+ lkml (linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx).
+ Always including lkml in addition to more specific lists is usually OK.
+
PLEASE check your patch with the automated style checker
(scripts/checkpatch.pl) to catch trival style violations.
See Documentation/CodingStyle for guidance here.