Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 20 Mar 2010 19:03:36 +0100 | From | Andi Kleen <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: Add check for too short Kconfig descriptions |
| |
On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 06:24:45PM +0100, Tilman Schmidt wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Am 2010-03-20 15:07 schrieb Andi Kleen: > > The warning merely is intended to get people to think > > about that. Yes it cannot enforce it directly. > > Then change the wording, at least. With the current wording, people will > think, "But I did!", and complain about a false positive on LKML, where > they will be annoyed to learn that checkpatch.pl's criterion for > "describing fully" is "having at least four lines".
Change to what? If you have a better suggestion I can change it.
> > But even with a better wording, I think the warning will still do more > harm than good.
We have to agree to disagree on that then.
> > > Yes it's not a perfect measure and can be circumvented. But hopefully > > most users would not. > > I'm not thinking of circumvention, but of well-meaning authors writing > long explanations that describe everything the author found worth > mentioning, but still don't answer the essential question: "Should I > select that option?" In fact, most of the unhelpful Kconfig help texts > I've encountered where longer than four lines. :-)
I don't disagree that longer help texts can be unhelpful too, but at least there's some chance that they are.
For a single sentence it's very unlikely ever that it's helpful.
-Andi
-- ak@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
| |