Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1761167AbXFQWlT (ORCPT ); Sun, 17 Jun 2007 18:41:19 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753605AbXFQWlM (ORCPT ); Sun, 17 Jun 2007 18:41:12 -0400 Received: from [212.12.190.81] ([212.12.190.81]:32859 "EHLO raad.intranet" rhost-flags-FAIL-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752980AbXFQWlL (ORCPT ); Sun, 17 Jun 2007 18:41:11 -0400 From: Al Boldi To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: How to improve the quality of the kernel? Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 01:41:41 +0300 User-Agent: KMail/1.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200706180141.41101.a1426z@gawab.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1078 Lines: 28 Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > On Sunday 17 June 2007, Andrew Morton wrote: > > We of course do want to minimise the amount of overhead for each > > developer. I'm a strong believer in specialisation: rather than > > requiring that *every* developer/maintainer integrate new steps in their > > processes it would be better to allow them to proceed in a > > close-to-usual fashion and to provide for a specialist person (or team) > > to do the sorts of things which you're thinking about. > > Makes sense... however we need to educate each and every developer about > importance of the code review and proper recognition of reviewers. That's as easy to manage as is currently done with rc-regressions. Maybe Adrian can introduce a "Patch Review Tacking" system akin to the his "rc-Regression Tracking" system. Thanks! -- Al - 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/