On: Linux is dead, long-live Docker monoculture

[erhk]

Submit a patch with behavior B with the intent of delivering behavior A. Maintainer accepts it on the premise that behavior B is a good change. Since iti s self documenting, it correctly documents the wrong thing. You've now made a patch that you don't understand.

[pritambaral → erhk]

> Maintainer accepts it on the premise that behavior B is a good change.

This requires that:

1. The patch come with no commentary that says it's a WIP; and/or

2. The maintainer(s) do not read any attached commentary (when and why did we stop reading commit messages?!); and

3. The maintainer(s) do not read/care that the patch is wrong.

----

In short: your scenario works only when everyone does their job poorly.

[erhk → pritambaral]

>In short: your scenario works only when everyone does their job poorly. Yes well thats vaguely the shape of the point I was making

[pritambaral → erhk]

> Yes well thats vaguely the shape of the point I was making

So, your point is that something is bad because it's /possible/ everyone involved with it could be terrible at their jobs? If that's your point, then I can't imagine why you'd try to make it, because it applies to nearly everything in the universe of "doing things".

Similar to your original comment of "You've now made a patch that you don't understand.", you've now made a point that you don't understand.