From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933717Ab3GPXqQ (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Jul 2013 19:46:16 -0400 Received: from hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([71.74.56.122]:14744 "EHLO hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933948Ab3GPXqM (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Jul 2013 19:46:12 -0400 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.0 cv=Odoa/2vY c=1 sm=0 a=Sro2XwOs0tJUSHxCKfOySw==:17 a=Drc5e87SC40A:10 a=p1-IFUXKkGwA:10 a=5SG0PmZfjMsA:10 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=meVymXHHAAAA:8 a=KGjhK52YXX0A:10 a=kbqBV6VKySQA:10 a=Uk9KNRUCsiPH1yeryxkA:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=Sro2XwOs0tJUSHxCKfOySw==:117 X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 X-Authenticated-User: X-Originating-IP: 67.255.60.225 Message-ID: <1374018370.6458.106.camel@gandalf.local.home> Subject: Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review) From: Steven Rostedt To: Sarah Sharp Cc: David Lang , ksummit-2013-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org, Greg Kroah-Hartman , Darren Hart , Olivier Galibert , stable , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Willy Tarreau , Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2013 19:46:10 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1374017917.6458.103.camel@gandalf.local.home> References: <20130715204135.GH15531@xanatos> <1373926109.17876.221.camel@gandalf.local.home> <20130715223615.GI15531@xanatos> <20130716211235.GG4994@xanatos> <20130716212704.GB9371@thunk.org> <20130716224357.GK4994@xanatos> <1374015299.6458.76.camel@gandalf.local.home> <20130716231217.GL4994@xanatos> <1374017917.6458.103.camel@gandalf.local.home> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.4.4-3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 19:38 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > I'll admit that when I first started sending patches to LKML, I was > terrified. Not because I was afraid of being scolded, but because I was > afraid that what I sent wasn't good. It was a true judgment of my work. > I was prettified. Sure, I wouldn't have liked being insulted, but as OK, this has happened *again*! Really spell check? "pettrified" became "prettified", and not "petrified"???? I just need to spell better :-p Although, I have to admit, getting patches into the kernel has made me prettier ;-) -- Steve > long as there was backing of why my work sucked I would be OK with it. I > actually had a rather good response to my work and I hung around.