IMO, submissions about a new LWN kernel update or a new KernelTraffic are already superfluous; i guess it's okay to have news on them for a week or three, but submissions about *every* new krneltraffic||LWN||status-of-2.5 are wholly unnecessary.
also, if you're going to submit news about them, at least put up a summary of it, or put up something like "lwn.net has posted this week's kernel update, which covers the IDE mantainer change, the large number of kernel trees, futexes, and the 23-second kernel compile".
>So maybe you should flame the editor not the submiter.
Not really a flame (i really should re-read stuff before posting).
And what i really meant (or what i recall i meant) was "it gets tiresome after the first few times of posting LWN news" (or something like that), not "death to the LWN posters!".
This kind of news is superfluous
IMO, submissions about a new LWN kernel update or a new KernelTraffic are already superfluous; i guess it's okay to have news on them for a week or three, but submissions about *every* new krneltraffic||LWN||status-of-2.5 are wholly unnecessary.
also, if you're going to submit news about them, at least put up a summary of it, or put up something like "lwn.net has posted this week's kernel update, which covers the IDE mantainer change, the large number of kernel trees, futexes, and the 23-second kernel compile".
re: This kind of news is superfluous
While I agree the subject listing would be nice. This story has been posted on KT by the current editor before:
March 7
Feb 21
So maybe you should flame the editor not the submiter.
--Nate
re: This kind of news is superfluous
>So maybe you should flame the editor not the submiter.
Not really a flame (i really should re-read stuff before posting).
And what i really meant (or what i recall i meant) was "it gets tiresome after the first few times of posting LWN news" (or something like that), not "death to the LWN posters!".
hjhjh
hjhj