Grant Grundler wrote:This growth of SubmittingPatches and related documents also partly means that we now have - more tools available for QA before posting, - more documentation on these tools, - more comprehensive documentation on the workflows. To some degree, this should make contributions easier rather than harder. It may of course also mean that some expectations are higher now, as you are saying AFAIU. However, with scarce reviewer base (and scarce early testers base, compared to the whole userbase), it's not a bad thing for the project health if patches, when first posted, already have a good level of quality. We want many good contributions, not just many contributions. Of course if there were many reviewers and many mentors, than we could do with lower initial quality of submissions. -- Stefan Richter -=====-==--- -=-= ===== http://arcgraph.de/sr/ --
| Martin Michlmayr | Network slowdown due to CFS |
| Ingo Molnar | Re: containers (was Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23) |
| Ingo Molnar | Re: x86 arch updates also broke s390 |
| Greg KH | [GIT PATCH] driver core patches against 2.6.24 |
git: | |
| David Miller | [GIT]: Networking |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 27/37] dccp: Integration of dynamic feature activation - part 2 (server side) |
| Jarek Poplawski | [PATCH iproute2 v2] Re: HTB accuracy for high speed |
| Jarek Poplawski | [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
