Request to mailing list U-Boot-Users rejected
A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): [email protected]
Quoted 1 line · On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 08:23:21 -0800 u-boot-users-bounces at…
"Your message was too big; please trim it to less than 40 KB in size."
Oh for fsck sakes...
Quoted 1 line
Message body is too big: 40979 bytes with a limit of 40 KB
If you can't cut me 900 bytes of slack, I'm not going to bother anymore. That patch was _seriously_ painful and I'm not going to do it again just to shave off enough to get it below the arbitrary mailing-list limit.
Haavard
Quoted 11 lines · Haavard Skinnemoen
Quoted 1 line · u-boot-users-bounces at lists.sourceforge.net
"Your message was too big; please trim it to less than 40 KB in size."
Oh for fsck sakes...
Quoted 1 line
Message body is too big: 40979 bytes with a limit of 40 KB
If you can't cut me 900 bytes of slack, I'm not going to bother anymore. That patch was _seriously_ painful and I'm not going to do it again just to shave off enough to get it below the arbitrary mailing-list limit.
100k limit, please.
Best regards,
Stefan
=====================================================================
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: +49-8142-66989-0 Fax: +49-8142-66989-80 Email: office at denx.de
=====================================================================
Quoted 1 line · Stefan Roese
100k limit, please.
Me too. 40k is too small. 100k is much better.
Signature · 2 lines
Timur Tabi Linux kernel developer at Freescale
Quoted 2 lines · In message <[email protected]> you wrote:
Quoted 2 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Message body is too big: 40979 bytes with a limit of 40 KB
...
Quoted 1 line
100k limit, please.
And what happens whith the next posting with a size of 100k + N bytes?
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk
Signature · 7 lines
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
"Obviously, a major malfunction has occurred."
-- Steve Nesbitt, voice of Mission Control, January 28,
1986, as the shuttle Challenger exploded within view
of the grandstands.Quoted 8 lines · Wolfgang Denk
Quoted 1 line · In message <[email protected]> you wrote:
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
Message body is too big: 40979 bytes with a limit of 40 KB
...
Quoted 1 line
100k limit, please.
And what happens whith the next posting with a size of 100k + N bytes?
with that logic, why allow 40k. take it down to 10k. or 1k.
posting valid patches that exceed 40k is not uncommon. patches exceeding 100k is much less uncommon.
-mike
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 827 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20071211/747e4d3c/attachment.pgp
Quoted 6 lines · Mike Frysinger
Quoted 5 lines · Wolfgang Denk
Quoted 1 line · In message <[email protected]> you wrote:
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
Message body is too big: 40979 bytes with a limit of 40 KB
...
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 3 lines
Quoted 1 line
100k limit, please.
And what happens whith the next posting with a size of 100k + N bytes?
with that logic, why allow 40k. take it down to 10k. or 1k.
posting valid patches that exceed 40k is not uncommon. patches exceeding 100k is much less uncommon.
actually, if you're NAK-ing this by yourself, then i dont see why you'ed NAK a valid patch in the first place.
someone posts a log file or configuration file or something that exceeds the limit makes sense. people developing source code when patches are supposed to be sent to the list does not.
-mike
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 827 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20071211/6547d9f5/attachment.pgp
Quoted 13 lines · Mike Frysinger
Quoted 11 lines · Mike Frysinger
Quoted 6 lines · Wolfgang Denk
Quoted 1 line · In message <[email protected]> you wrote:
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
Message body is too big: 40979 bytes with a limit of 40 KB
...
Quoted 1 line
100k limit, please.
And what happens whith the next posting with a size of 100k + N bytes?
with that logic, why allow 40k. take it down to 10k. or 1k.
posting valid patches that exceed 40k is not uncommon. patches exceeding 100k is much less uncommon.
Quoted 7 lines
actually, if you're NAK-ing this by yourself, then i dont see why you'ed NAK a valid patch in the first place.
someone posts a log file or configuration file or something that exceeds the limit makes sense. people developing source code when patches are supposed to be sent to the list does not.
-mike
I would agree with Mike... have a soft limit of 40K where bounced messages go to Wolfgang and he authorizes "reasonable" patches. Alternatively, set the limit higher (100K) and cut it back if it gets abused. I suspect it won't.
I don't know how many "oversize" (>40K) messages Wolfgang sees. Judging from the small number of complaints about oversize bounces on the list, it doesn't seem to be many.
Discarding oversize patches on a hard numerical criteria rather than on a softer validity criteria is easy for decision making but hard on the developers. Arbitrarily breaking (in *both* senses of the word) patches just to fit them under the 40K limit causes more work and results in *less* benefit.
I like Koha's motto: "Every time a patch falls on the floor, a kitten dies." <http://wiki.koha.org/doku.php?id=en:development:git_usage>
We should be encouraging patches of a reasonable size and should be flexible on the definition of "reasonable." We are willing to use 3rd party code (e.g. linux driver code) that may not quite meet our coding standards because it is useful and expedient to not have to rewrite perfectly good code. If we have reasonable flexibility on coding standards, why not on patch sizes???
My 2 cents,
gvb
P.S. courtesy of Ogden Nash :-)
THE KITTEN
----------
The trouble with a kitten is
THAT
Eventually it becomes a
CAT.
Quoted 4 lines · In message <[email protected]> you wrote:
Quoted 2 lines
And what happens whith the next posting with a size of 100k + N bytes?
with that logic, why allow 40k. take it down to 10k. or 1k.
40 kB is the default value.
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk
Signature · 5 lines
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
It is better to marry than to burn.
- Bible ``I Corinthians'' ch. 7, v. 9Quoted 10 lines · Wolfgang Denk
Quoted 4 lines · In message <[email protected]> you wrote:
Quoted 2 lines
And what happens whith the next posting with a size of 100k + N bytes?
with that logic, why allow 40k. take it down to 10k. or 1k.
40 kB is the default value.
Powerful reasoning indeed. It reminds me of when I tell my little boy "because I say so"
regards,
Ben
Quoted 5 lines · Haavard Skinnemoen
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 08:23:21 -0800
Quoted 1 line · u-boot-users-bounces at lists.sourceforge.net
"Your message was too big; please trim it to less than 40 KB in size."
Quoted 8 lines
Oh for fsck sakes...
Quoted 1 line
Message body is too big: 40979 bytes with a limit of 40 KB
If you can't cut me 900 bytes of slack, I'm not going to bother anymore. That patch was _seriously_ painful and I'm not going to do it again just to shave off enough to get it below the arbitrary mailing-list limit.
it's an automated message ... it isnt like Wolfgang is sitting there a rejecting each one
related, i'd agree that a 40kb limit on a list that expects to be getting [sometimes sizable] patches is wrong
-mike
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 827 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20071211/95273386/attachment.pgp
Quoted 9 lines · Mike Frysinger
Quoted 5 lines · Haavard Skinnemoen
Quoted 1 line
Message body is too big: 40979 bytes with a limit of 40 KB
If you can't cut me 900 bytes of slack, I'm not going to bother anymore. That patch was _seriously_ painful and I'm not going to do it again just to shave off enough to get it below the arbitrary mailing-list limit.
it's an automated message ... it isnt like Wolfgang is sitting there a rejecting each one
No, but he has sat there rejecting all prior requests to increase the limit...
-Scott
Quoted 2 lines · In message <[email protected]> you wrote:
Quoted 2 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Message body is too big: 40979 bytes with a limit of 40 KB
...
Quoted 2 lines
it's an automated message ... it isnt like Wolfgang is sitting there a rejecting each one
Oh, it *is* me. As a list moderator I have to NAK these manually. But the way I see it I can only be fair by NAKing all such requests. Even if the exceed the limit by just a single byte.
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk
Signature · 5 lines
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de Living on Earth may be expensive, but it includes an annual free trip around the Sun.
Quoted 10 lines · On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 23:26:11 +0100 Wolfgang Denk <[email protected]> wrote:
Quoted 2 lines · In message <[email protected]> you wrote:
Quoted 2 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Message body is too big: 40979 bytes with a limit of 40 KB
...
Quoted 2 lines
it's an automated message ... it isnt like Wolfgang is sitting there a rejecting each one
Oh, it *is* me. As a list moderator I have to NAK these manually. But the way I see it I can only be fair by NAKing all such requests. Even if the exceed the limit by just a single byte.
Then why don't you set it up to NAK such messages unconditionally?
What really pissed me off this time is that it was so obvious that you went in, looked at the message and rejected it explicitly even though it was only slightly above the limit and I specifically said in the introductory e-mail that this particular patch is hard to rebase.
Now, what do you want me to do? Shorten the log message? Remove some comments?
Haavard
Quoted 3 lines · In message <[email protected]> you wrote:
Now, what do you want me to do? Shorten the log message? Remove some comments?
Quoting http://www.denx.de/wiki/UBoot/Patches :
Remember that there is a size limit of 40 kB on the mailing list. In most cases, you did something wrong if your patch exceeds this limit. Think again if you should not split it into separate logical parts. If your patch, uncompressed, exceeds this limit, and you are absolutely sure that you should not split it, then provide a URL (link) pointing to your patch instead.
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk
Signature · 6 lines
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
I wish Captain Vimes were here. He wouldn't have known what to do
either, but he's got a much better vocabulary to be baffled in.
- Terry Pratchett, _Guards! Guards!_Hi Wolfgang,
Quoted 5 lines · Wolfgang Denk
Quoted 2 lines
Now, what do you want me to do? Shorten the log message? Remove some comments?
Quoting http://www.denx.de/wiki/UBoot/Patches :
Quoted 7 lines
Remember that there is a size limit of 40 kB on the mailing list. In most cases, you did something wrong if your patch exceeds this limit. Think again if you should not split it into separate logical parts. If your patch, uncompressed, exceeds this limit, and you are absolutely sure that you should not split it, then provide a URL (link) pointing to your patch instead.
Don't you think after the feedback we got in this thread (all developers voting for 100k limit instead of 40k), that it would be good to change the limit?
Please reconsider. Thanks.
Best regards,
Stefan
=====================================================================
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: +49-8142-66989-0 Fax: +49-8142-66989-80 Email: office at denx.de
=====================================================================
Quoted 22 lines · Stefan Roese
Hi Wolfgang,
Quoted 5 lines · Wolfgang Denk
Quoted 2 lines
Now, what do you want me to do? Shorten the log message? Remove some comments?
Quoting http://www.denx.de/wiki/UBoot/Patches :
Quoted 7 lines
Remember that there is a size limit of 40 kB on the mailing list. In most cases, you did something wrong if your patch exceeds this limit. Think again if you should not split it into separate logical parts. If your patch, uncompressed, exceeds this limit, and you are absolutely sure that you should not split it, then provide a URL (link) pointing to your patch instead.
Don't you think after the feedback we got in this thread (all developers
voting for 100k limit instead of 40k), that it would be good to change the
limit?
Quoted 4 lines
Please reconsider. Thanks.
Best regards,
Stefan
Just to add my two cents, I believe the linuxppc-dev lists is set to 100k and we don't seem to have much issue w/it at that limit.
- k
Quoted 27 lines · Kumar Gala
Quoted 24 lines · Stefan Roese
Hi Wolfgang,
Quoted 5 lines · Wolfgang Denk
Quoted 2 lines
Now, what do you want me to do? Shorten the log message? Remove some comments?
Quoting http://www.denx.de/wiki/UBoot/Patches :
Quoted 7 lines
Remember that there is a size limit of 40 kB on the mailing list. In most cases, you did something wrong if your patch exceeds this limit. Think again if you should not split it into separate logical parts. If your patch, uncompressed, exceeds this limit, and you are absolutely sure that you should not split it, then provide a URL (link) pointing to your patch instead.
Don't you think after the feedback we got in this thread (all developers
voting for 100k limit instead of 40k), that it would be good to change the
limit?Please reconsider. Thanks.
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Best regards,
StefanJust to add my two cents, I believe the linuxppc-dev lists is set to 100k and we don't seem to have much issue w/it at that limit.
- k
I also vote for 100K. That should be enough for everyone (c) B.Gates :)
---
******************************************************************
* KSI at home KOI8 Net < > The impossible we do immediately. *
* Las Vegas NV, USA < > Miracles require 24-hour notice. *
******************************************************************
Quoted 2 lines · Kumar Gala
Just to add my two cents, I believe the linuxppc-dev lists is set to 100k and we don't seem to have much issue w/it at that limit.
The 40k limit comes from an age where we all have been connected to the rest of the world with 64k lines; although I'm deeply against encouraging people to send around multi megabyte office documents, 100k sounds like a pretty good compromise for lists containing patches.
rsc
Signature · 5 lines
Dipl.-Ing. Robert Schwebel | http://www.pengutronix.de
Pengutronix - Linux Solutions for Science and Industry
Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686
Hannoversche Str. 2, 31134 Hildesheim, Germany
Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-9Quoted 3 lines · Wolfgang Denk
Oh, it *is* me. As a list moderator I have to NAK these manually. But the way I see it I can only be fair by NAKing all such requests. Even if the exceed the limit by just a single byte.
This policy isn't helping anyone, however. It's making more work for you, because you spend more time NAK'ing patches. It's more work for the people who contribute patches, because they need to find other ways to submit the patches.
No one is saying that the limit should be removed. We're just saying that 40K is too low. As far as I'm concerned, it has *always* been too low. 100K is reasonable.
Signature · 2 lines
Timur Tabi Linux kernel developer at Freescale