On Mar 21, 2011, at 17:34, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
In message AC0C0781-9E5F-42F7-9DB6-EECF6A5BE840@boeing.com you wrote:
Just looking at the last ~200 commits (actually 187, because it ignores merges):
$ git format-patch -o recent-patches -200 origin/master $ ./checkpatch.pl --no-tree --strict recent-patches/* >checkpatch.log 2>&1 $ grep 'over 80 char' checkpatch.log | wc -l 130
That's 130 lines in the last 200 patches which are over 80 characters?!?! How are those patches any different from mine?
The difference is: They were not detected.
Patches welcome.
If those were patches from two years ago and your style policies had significantly changed since then I would understand.
But those are patches from *LAST MONTH* which you were perfectly happy to merge from dozens of different developers, but had *I* submitted identical patches they would have been rejected without even a second glance.
That is inconsistent at best, and in my humble opinion downright rude.
Look, I'm really trying to comply with U-Boot coding standards, but I'm really of pissed off about the inconsistent requirements you are applying to my patches versus a lot of other things that YOU ARE MERGING on a regular basis.
The requirements are NOT inconsistent. It's just that nobody is perfect, and nobody ever claimed that we manage to get 100% of review coverage.
I give up.
I apparently cannot rely on the U-Boot *CODE* to understand what the U-Boot *CODING* style is.
The time investment to get reasonable board support merged into U-Boot is proving to be *greater* than the time investment to just maintain our board ports out of tree.
If anyone would like to use our code as a reference or try to get it merged themselves, I will continue to maintain our GPLed out-of-tree patchset here: http://opensource.exmeritus.com/git/
But otherwise I see no valid reason I should waste any more of my time submitting patches which get torn apart out of hand over issues which are completely ignored for patches which come in from other maintainers.
In the future we will have to weigh other boot-loader alternatives due to the unfriendly attitude here.
Good luck.
Cheers, Kyle Moffett