[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    [W:0.020 / U:7.028 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site