| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Files | Lines |
|---|
|
Some of us gotten used to producing large quantities of peer feedback
at work, every 3 or 6 months. Extending the same courtesy to community
members seems like a logical step. It may be hard for some folks to
get validation of how important their work is internally, especially
at smaller companies which don't employ many kernel experts.
The concept of "peer feedback" may be a hyperscaler / silicon valley
thing so YMMV. Hopefully we can build more context as we go.
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
Summarize the rules we see broken most often and which may
be less familiar to kernel devs who are used to working outside
of netdev.
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
Similarly to the 15 patch rule the reverse xmas tree is not
documented.
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
We had been asking people to avoid massive patch series but it does
not appear in the FAQ.
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
|
The documentation for the tip tree is really in quite a similar
spirit to the netdev-FAQ. Move the netdev-FAQ to the process docs
as well.
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>
|
