Hi!
> I don't this Albert is the problem, I am starting to suspect we simply lack
> custodian manpower in general. And I also suspect we're not quite inviting
> and attractive crowd, which is something we should discuss too ...
As I said privately, I believe we have way too many custodians...
Anyway, u-boot code looks similar to kernel code, but patch submission
rules are really different.
Something like this could help..?
Pavel
--- /dev/null 2014-10-09 01:15:57.354292026 +0200
+++ doc/SubmittingPatches 2014-10-09 23:58:53.058883776 +0200
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+Differences from kernel:
+
+* SPDX license headers are required.
+
+* puts() is preffered over single-argument prinf()
+
+* later versions of patch should come with "diff changelog" below "---"
+
+* subject should begin with tags, such as "arm: socfpga:"
+
+* should pass checkpatch
\ No newline at end of file
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures)
http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
