Messages in this thread | | | From | "Helge Hafting" <> | Date | Thu, 01 Oct 1998 09:30:35 +0100 | Subject | Re: Automating basic patch tests... |
| |
In <Pine.LNX.3.96.980930214011.31107D-100000@ps.cus.umist.ac.uk>, on 09/30/98 at 09:59 PM, Riley Williams <rhw@bigfoot.com> said:
[...] >As a very basic minimum, I'd like to suggest that it perform the >following tests: [good tests snipped]
> 3. How many different files does the patch modify? Should there > be a limit on this number, to discourage submission of patches > that change too much at once?
> 4. (As an alternative to 3) How many different directories does > the patch modify files in?
I believe there will be infrequent occations where a patch has to modify files "all over the place" If those are auto- rejected then some alternate mechanism must be used for such occations. (Such as emailing Linus directly) Not good, because people getting rejects for other reasons may decide to use the alternate approach too.
Instead of auto-rejecting just send the author a warning that he ought to be careful with this type of patch, and mark it as "dubious". Only real people can make a good decision.
If such patches become a workload problem anyway, forward them to someone else who can see if they make sense before possibly passing them on to Linus.
Helge Hafting
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |