[lkml]   [2003]   [Dec]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Fixing 2.6.0's broken documentation references
On Sun, 28 Dec 2003 21:48:57 +1100 (EST) Michael Still <> wrote:

| 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?

I agree, using kernel-janitors or trivial patch monkey should be
sufficient and acceptable.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:59    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital Ocean