Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752705AbaFBSM5 (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Jun 2014 14:12:57 -0400 Received: from mail-ob0-f170.google.com ([209.85.214.170]:54550 "EHLO mail-ob0-f170.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751438AbaFBSM4 (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Jun 2014 14:12:56 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1401731968.7323.4.camel@joe-AO725> References: <1401728420-3572-1-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1401729778.5770.20.camel@joe-AO725> <20140602174837.GA13257@cloud> <1401731968.7323.4.camel@joe-AO725> Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2014 14:12:55 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 65SIhz2pc98SXaJbbAacqQgmWhk Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/2] MAINTAINERS: Add "R:" designated-reviewers tag From: Josh Boyer To: Joe Perches Cc: Josh Triplett , "Paul E. McKenney" , "Linux-Kernel@Vger. Kernel. Org" , Ingo Molnar , laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com, Andrew Morton , Mathieu Desnoyers , niv@us.ibm.com, Thomas Gleixner , Peter Zijlstra , Steven Rostedt , David Howells , Eric Dumazet , Darren Hart , =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Fr=E9d=E9ric_Weisbecker?= , oleg@redhat.com, sbw@mit.edu Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 1:59 PM, Joe Perches wrote: > On Mon, 2014-06-02 at 10:48 -0700, josh@joshtriplett.org wrote: >> On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 10:22:58AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: >> > On Mon, 2014-06-02 at 10:00 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: >> > > A ksummit-discuss email thread looked at the difficulty recruiting >> > > and retaining reviewers. >> > >> > [] >> > >> > > Paul Walmsley also noted the need for patch >> > > submitters to know who the key reviewers are and suggested adding an >> > > "R:" tag to the MAINTAINERS file to record this information on a >> > > per-subsystem basis. >> > >> > I'm not sure of the value of this. >> > >> > Why not just mark the actual reviewers as maintainers? >> >> As discussed in the kernel summit discussion, being a regular patch >> reviewer isn't the same thing as being *the* maintainer. > > I think it's not particularly important or valuable > here to make that distinction. > > What real difference does it make? It depends. If the Maintainer moves to a model where patches must be reviewed before they are added to the tree, then having a designated reviewer helps. It gives the patch submitter another person to include, and if the Reviewer acks a patch, they know it's much more likely to make it in-tree. If the tree isn't managed that way, then Reviewer/Maintainer is a bit less distinctive, but it still provides at least some indication that a "maintainer" looked at the patch instead of having it just sit on the list. josh -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/