Re: kernel config
Wed, 26 Jul 95 13:47:52 CDT

In a previous letter, Russ Nelson wrote:
> Read the code. Write down your understanding of it as comments.
> Submit them as patches. If they're horribly wrong, someone else will
> submit comment-bug-fixes. The only way to accomplish anything is to
> do it yourself, not to exhort and cajole others.

Then "cloister bell <>" wrote:
>i have to disagree with that. comments in the code should *not* be
>wrong; certainly not horribly so. if the point of having comments is to
>help people understand the kernel, then adding incorrect comments can
>only hurt that effort.

I believe that Russ was implying that someone with a "more than minimal"
knowledge of the sections of code they were commenting would be submitting
the comments. I don't think that commenting should be the *complete*
of the programmer working on the code. In any event, if someone does start
putting comments in they might stumble across a logic bug or make finding
them easier.

Later, Cloister said: "[...] but i wouldn't submit kernel comment
patches unless you have good reasons for thinking they're correct. if
there are issues you're unclear about, ask about them here before
finalizing your patch. [...]"

VERY TRUE! Since everyone getting this E-mail should have access
to reply to comments, it would probably be a great place to start asking.
If things get too long winded, we could always start another mailing list
for kernel comments -- Kernel Komments? :) At any rate, Russ has made
very good comment: "Linus does a good job of weeding out the cruft."
I would propose having one/two central people for a comment organizer
and then let them submit the comments to Linus.


* Dan Linder - Inacom :: National System Support Center