Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752871AbaFBSQD (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Jun 2014 14:16:03 -0400 Received: from smtprelay0081.hostedemail.com ([216.40.44.81]:53585 "EHLO smtprelay.hostedemail.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752289AbaFBSQB (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Jun 2014 14:16:01 -0400 X-Session-Marker: 6A6F6540706572636865732E636F6D X-Spam-Summary: 2,0,0,,d41d8cd98f00b204,joe@perches.com,:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::,RULES_HIT:41:355:379:541:599:800:960:973:988:989:1260:1261:1277:1311:1313:1314:1345:1359:1373:1437:1515:1516:1518:1534:1541:1593:1594:1711:1730:1747:1777:1792:2198:2199:2393:25 X-HE-Tag: hair63_8ae0f23667b1d X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 3333 Message-ID: <1401732953.7323.6.camel@joe-AO725> Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/2] MAINTAINERS: Add "R:" designated-reviewers tag From: Joe Perches To: Josh Boyer 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 Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2014 11:15:53 -0700 In-Reply-To: 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> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.10.4-0ubuntu1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2014-06-02 at 14:12 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: > 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. So effectively, nothing. -- 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/