[Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] checkpatch/Codingstyle and trivial patch spam

Julia Lawall julia.lawall at lip6.fr
Wed Sep 14 19:26:19 UTC 2016



On Wed, 14 Sep 2016, Theodore Ts'o wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 04:35:06PM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> >
> > The --force is only required for non-staging code?  If it is required for
> > staging code, then we will have to document it in the outreachy tutorial,
> > and then all the (non-outreachy) newbies who look at the tutorial will
> > know about it...
>
> The whole point of the option is to try to discourage people from
> sending white-space (or only style-only) patches.  So I'm not so sure
> that it would be such a tragedy if people like (for example) Markus
> Elfing or Nick Krause don't find out about the --force option right
> away.  Given that outreachy folks are encouraged to work on staging
> code anyway, would it make a difference to them?

People other than outreachy applicants may look at the outreachy tutorial.
It is even written that way in some cases.  I guess that checkpatch could
detect whether -f is used on a staging driver and not require --force if
that is the case.  This would have the other desirable benefit of reducing
the chance that outreachy applicants will send patches on non-staging
code.

julia


More information about the Ksummit-discuss mailing list