Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 29 Jan 2002 20:23:54 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 29 Jan 2002 20:23:44 -0500 Received: from tomts19-srv.bellnexxia.net ([209.226.175.73]:40934 "EHLO tomts19-srv.bellnexxia.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 29 Jan 2002 20:23:36 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII From: Ed Tomlinson Organization: me To: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: A modest proposal -- We need a patch penguin Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 20:23:08 -0500 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.3.2] Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Message-Id: <20020130012308.B37AA6FB3@oscar.casa.dyndns.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Tue, 29 Jan 2002, Rob Landley wrote: >> > > >> > > Then why not give the subsystem maintainers patch permissions on your >> > > tree. Sort of like committers. The problem people have is that >> > > you're dropping patches from those ten-twenty people you trust. >> > >> > No. Ask them, and they will (I bet) pretty uniformly tell you that I'm >> > _not_ dropping their patches (although I'm sometimes critical of them, >> > and will tell them that they do not get applied). >> >> Andre Hedrick, Eric Raymond, Rik van Riel, Michael Elizabeth Chastain, >> Axel Boldt... > > NONE of those are in the ten-twenty people group. > > How many people do you think fits in a small group? Hint. It sure isn't > all 300 on the maintainers list. > >> Ah. So being listed in the maintainers list doesn't mean someone is >> actually a maintainer it makes sense to forward patches to? > > Sure it does. > > It just doesn't mean that they should send stuff to _me_. This is the salient point. I have been reading lkml for about two years and it was not an obivous one... > Did you not understand my point about scalability? I can work with a > limited number of people, and those people can work with _their_ limited > number of people etc etc. Why not arange the MAINTAINERS file so everyone knows the path you would like patches to follow? If everyone understands they should first try lkml or the MAINTAINER and, once the MAINTAINER and/or lkml agree, the patch should be sent (by the MAINTAINER if he/she was involved) to a trustee who vets it again and sends it on to you. Why not formalize the list of 'trustees' in the MAINTAINER files? IMO people will happily work with your procedures, but they _do_ have to understand them - not always an easy task. Ed Tomlinson - 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/