>Russell King writes:
>> On Thu, Dec 27, 2001 at 04:33:50PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
>> > Tridge wrote the system you describe, several years ago. Its called
>> > jitterbug but it doesnt help because Linus wont use it
>>
>> Speaking as someone who _does_ use a system for tracking patches, I
>> believe that patch management systems are a right pain in the arse.
>>
>> If the quality of patches aren't good, then it throws you into a
>> problem. You have to provide people with a reason why you discarded
>> their patch, which provides people with the perfect opportunity to
>> immediately start bugging you about exactly how to make it better.
>> If you get lots of such patches, eventually you've got a mailbox of
>> people wanting to know how to make their patches better.
>
>So you just do what Linus does: delete those questions without
>replying. No matter what system you use, if you want to avoid an
>overflowing mailbox, you either have to silently drop patches, and/or
>silently drop questions/requests/begging letters. There isn't really
>much difference between the two.
>
> Regards,
>
> Richard....
Sounds like IP translated into human systems. We aren't surprised when
a UDP packet is silently dropped for one of a thousand reasons.
john alvord
-
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/