From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263052AbVFXE4i (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Jun 2005 00:56:38 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263080AbVFXE4i (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Jun 2005 00:56:38 -0400 Received: from chretien.genwebhost.com ([209.59.175.22]:47511 "EHLO chretien.genwebhost.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263052AbVFXEyy (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Jun 2005 00:54:54 -0400 Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 21:54:46 -0700 From: randy_dunlap To: Paul Jackson Cc: akpm@osdl.org, jgarzik@pobox.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: -mm -> 2.6.13 merge status Message-Id: <20050623215446.0e5ce93e.rdunlap@xenotime.net> In-Reply-To: <20050623210638.53232e90.pj@sgi.com> References: <20050620235458.5b437274.akpm@osdl.org> <42B831B4.9020603@pobox.com> <20050621132204.1b57b6ba.akpm@osdl.org> <20050623210638.53232e90.pj@sgi.com> Organization: YPO4 X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 1.0.5 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Antivirus-Scanner: Clean mail though you should still use an Antivirus X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - chretien.genwebhost.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - vger.kernel.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - xenotime.net X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 21:06:38 -0700 Paul Jackson wrote: | > I wish people would absorb CodingStyle. | | Some people just can't see it, Andrew. Just like some people | are tone deaf, some people don't notice minor variations in | code spacing and layout, unless pointed out in tedious detail. | | Not that I disagree with you ... ;). I also agree. The problem (for me at least) is that bad coding style needs to be fixed before I can do a functional code review, so it slows down the review cycle quite a bit. Further, it's mostly well-known what the requirements are, so there aren't very many good excuses not to follow CodingStyle... --- ~Randy