Hi Jon,
A few minor things I found:
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net> writes:
quoted text > +in existence. Since its humble beginning in 1991, this kernel has evolved
> +into a best-of-breed operating system component which runs on pocket-sized
> +digital music players, desktop PCs, the largest supercomputers in
> +existence, and all types of system in between. It is a robust, efficient,
systems
quoted text > +- Binary modules greatly increase the difficulty of debugging kernel
> + problems, to the point that most kernel developers will not even try. So
> + the distribution of binary-only modules will make support harder for
> + those who use them.
The last sentence reads a little funny to me, maybe something like:
By distributing binary-only modules, you make it harder for you and your
users to get support.
quoted text > +kernel under the GPL. Code which has not been licensed as free software by
> +its owner, or which risks creating copyright-related problems for the
> +kernel (such as code which derives from improper reverse-engineering
> +efforts) cannot be contributed.
To me, this sort of implies that all reverse-engineering is improper, which
is not what you meant to say, I don't think.
quoted text > +A relatively straightforward discipline is followed with regard to the
> +merging of patches for each release. At the beginning of each development
> +cycle, the "merge window" is said to be open. At this time, code which is
"At this time" sounds like you are saying "now", "At that time" perhaps?
(maybe too picky)
quoted text > + - Early review. Patches are posted to the relevant mailing list, and
> + developers on that list reply with any comments they may have. This
> + process should turn up any major problems with a patch, if all goes
> + well.
The comma after "patch" seems confusing.
quoted text > +When the merge window opens, top-level maintainers will ask Linus to "pull"
> +the patches they have selected for merging from their repositories. If
> +Linus agrees, the stream of patches will flow up into his repository,
> +becoming part of the mainline kernel. The amount of attention that Linus
> +pays to specific patches received in a pull operation varies. It is clear
> +that, sometimes, he looks quite closely. But, as a general, Linus trusts
> +the subsystem maintainers to not send bad patches upstream.
do you mean that Linus is a general? or should that be "general rule"? It
could work either way.
quoted text > +degree of politeness. But there is no other place where the kernel
> +development community comes together as a whole; developers will avoid this
> +list at the risk of missing important information.
the last clause sounds like developers *will* avoid the list, maybe:
developers who avoid this list risk missing important information
quoted text > +patches. Those are the people who be best placed to help with a new
> +development project.
"who be best placed"? who will be best placed ...
quoted text > +One of the heavier debugging tools is the locking checker, or "lockdep."
should lockdep have a period?
quoted text > +how many people will build your code into their kernels. And, of course,
> +where there's testers, there's bug reports.
where there are testers, there are bug reports.
quoted text > +development history. An inconvenient patch (one which breaks bisection,
> +say, or which has some other sort of obvious bug) can be fixed in place or
> +make to disappear from the history entirely. A patch series can be
be made to disappear
quoted text > +read. Many internal kernel APIs are documented using the kerneldoc
> +mechanism; "make htmldocs" or "make pdfdocs" can be used to generate those
> +documents in HTML or PDF format (though the version of TeX shipped by some
> +distributions run into internal limits and fails to process the documents
> +properly).
"run into internal limits"? but, "runs into internal limits" doesn't seem
quite right either.
hope that helps,
jake
--
Jake Edge -
jake@lwn.net -
http://lwn.net
--
unsubscribe notice To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at
http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at
http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Messages in current thread:
Re: [PATCH, RFC] A development process document , Jake Edge , (Thu Jul 31, 4:45 pm)