From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paul Gortmaker Subject: Re: [RFC] Any value in having a netdev FAQ? Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 11:08:29 -0400 Message-ID: <51E6B36D.8010904@windriver.com> References: <20130716025954.GC26761@windriver.com> <20130716.130514.559781233978406598.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: , , To: David Miller Return-path: Received: from mail.windriver.com ([147.11.1.11]:51372 "EHLO mail.windriver.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932162Ab3GQPI1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Jul 2013 11:08:27 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20130716.130514.559781233978406598.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 13-07-16 04:05 PM, David Miller wrote: > From: Paul Gortmaker > Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2013 22:59:54 -0400 > >> I was wondering if you think there is value in having a netdev-faq type >> document available -- perhaps as a vger mailout to new subscribers or >> similar? For example, I have lost count of the number of times that you >> have had to tell people that net-next is closed during the merge window. >> But you would probably be right in telling me that those same people don't >> read documentation. Well, that aside, I suppose answering my question >> is easier when there is a proposed starting point for content. >> >> To that end, I've tried to collect a starting point based on repeated >> questions/corrections that I've seen over the years. I've added Greg to >> the Cc: in order to ensure I've captured the netdev-stable interaction >> correctly, and I've thrown Darren under the bus as a random content >> reviewer, since he has expressed an interest in documentation recently. >> >> Below is a possible starting point for content. Many answers I have >> written are from memory, long after losing links to netdev threads that >> served as evidence for the answers, so apologies in advance if I have >> failed to recall correctly the specific details in which you would like >> to see things done. > > Thanks a lot for writing this, it is useful. > > I think it's easier if this lives somewhere under > Documentation/networking in the kernel tree, then we can just point > people at it. > > What do you think? Sounds fine to me, I'll make some of the corrections Darren pointed out and send it along as a patch.