From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D719A7F for ; Tue, 4 Aug 2015 17:24:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vena.lwn.net (tex.lwn.net [70.33.254.29]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 97A9D209 for ; Tue, 4 Aug 2015 17:24:13 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2015 11:24:11 -0600 From: Jonathan Corbet To: Laurent Pinchart Message-ID: <20150804112411.7bbba71f@lwn.net> In-Reply-To: <6756795.jjv2YY7pQg@avalon> References: <20150801164142.653012af@lwn.net> <1893963.CjFnBCekyb@vostro.rjw.lan> <20150803083311.5abd23f6@lwn.net> <6756795.jjv2YY7pQg@avalon> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] Documentation List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tue, 04 Aug 2015 15:50:33 +0300 Laurent Pinchart wrote: > Maybe we just need to > tighten the review process and push harder for documentation, at the risk of > rejecting useful contributions. That's not a new problem though. It's so not-new that this idea has come up at a few kernel summits in the past. But better documentation is not something we can wish into existence; it's like saying we'll tighten the process to require more code review. That's why "how do we get more documentation?" wasn't really the question I posed at the beginning. We get it the way we get more code: get companies to pay people to write it. I don't think we can really make that happen at the kernel summit. We *can* maybe think about how we want our tools to look to make the process of writing and maintaining documentation easier, though. Tools won't solve the problem either, but maybe we can at least reduce the impedance somewhat. jon