From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from ms.lwn.net (ms.lwn.net [45.79.88.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9320030F543; Mon, 27 Oct 2025 17:44:34 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.79.88.28 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1761587076; cv=none; b=ZvmBK4GZtM0/Cys2OUVGp2sfn/u72gdUP9qYAs4hpbYXYD84l4kYmginn/YG/Kz/OQcJPUYzrwE7DSyn7hfu2g7nfquIWNZdkMnFShtXfWa0MEvcA7iGgAUP7nMofX5zvJrWRe14A7La57QnM7+e8Nq7oMP9Y0iKTRp8Iqmgdh8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1761587076; c=relaxed/simple; bh=RfDe/lk36tQ9ZdGPDwQ02XQAHmaEu1Gz4r8TGZV+Q48=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=fDSOf6GLvMTKrDDLipzciIl72U7BmAfd+NN1qGx+yRsRR6yvn4mG5ff0m48pDClhg2XWvai3BMUZQUZ6Z2Oj7Fu/Y6Xq46ePEXfli48RfT3UbNLNmVj+skuf/oPS3Zz1/9hz4vLVFA042KpoSZ6IEKTs4McPmoMqz4FTBvtS5js= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lwn.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lwn.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lwn.net header.i=@lwn.net header.b=EwRWcjft; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.79.88.28 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lwn.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lwn.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lwn.net header.i=@lwn.net header.b="EwRWcjft" DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 ms.lwn.net E62B540B18 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lwn.net; s=20201203; t=1761587074; bh=EkrU6qdStYnXfZpqvAS9tlf6vDNj3y10mTd/12SI7So=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=EwRWcjft/wYue7JisKvKQGpG6X7FZJ5d9pgR+itMqbVoja+8pedYQuBnwqU5Qu0mu MRisTn5GAWr/VtJd2EY3eGH9Cg26xNVlIR2bEd/L/S9JIwD4CNMqox0Nq1o8aEP+s+ JB5hltbxWkrtx84EaJB/J7QEQxOAYEdS1uTaWL8Gt0WZXz37vnlXmHay11nec5Ak32 fn+o5PhQ7d1kFewIW5k2m/LvHjD40oRplT9Yzh6YkzPESPMu3zN392YJ9n6UjxS2t3 YBBV6qgcVcNLjTlH1ZbFb7hpU/QPsZLmj+hOSyzUEOm9/vIkrld+UbJ16M/ZCJWuoK 63c9BSS6rzlBw== Received: from localhost (c-73-14-55-248.hsd1.co.comcast.net [73.14.55.248]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ms.lwn.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E62B540B18; Mon, 27 Oct 2025 17:44:33 +0000 (UTC) From: Jonathan Corbet To: Thorsten Leemhuis Cc: workflows@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, regressions@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 05/30] docs: reporting-issues: outline why reporting is complicated In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2025 11:44:33 -0600 Message-ID: <87ecqonsse.fsf@trenco.lwn.net> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: workflows@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Thorsten Leemhuis writes: > Replace the closing words with a section that describes why reporting > Linux kernel bugs is more complicated than in other FLOSS projects. > > Signed-off-by: Thorsten Leemhuis > --- > .../admin-guide/reporting-issues.rst | 67 ++++++++++++++++--- > 1 file changed, 59 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) So the text is OK but ... this is now the second section that is essentially a long apology for the kernel process being so difficult. It seems redundant with the other text, and I'm not convinced we need it. Again, length is an impediment to getting people to actually read this stuff; we should be trying to be as concise as we can. Do we really need this? Thanks, jon