From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
To: Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com>
Cc: "Chautru, Nicolas" <nicolas.chautru@intel.com>,
"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] maintainers: New Reviewer entry type added to MAINTAINERS
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2020 17:41:07 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1985785.NsDeZ6iOcB@thomas> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1dbf4aaf-7a77-101d-24ea-6e3faec6165f@redhat.com>
02/10/2020 16:59, Tom Rix:
>
> On 10/1/20 2:54 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > 01/10/2020 23:22, Chautru, Nicolas:
> >> From: trix@redhat.com <trix@redhat.com>
> >>> From: Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com>
> >>>
> >>> Copied from the Linux kernel MAINTAINERS file.
> >>> A Reviewer is designated person who wishes to review changes in areas of
> >>> interest.
> >>>
> >>> Added self as Reviewer for baseband.
> >>>
> >>> I am a Linux kernel Reviewer for the fpga n3000/vista creek which has
> >>> several bitstream based baseband devices. So I want to help out here as
> >>> well.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com>
> >> Thanks for the help.
> >> Note that they are a few other BBDEV patches in flight for 20.11 on top of the acc100 PMD that you may want to be aware of.
> >> https://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/list/?series=&submitter=chautru&state=&q=&archive=&delegate=
> >>
> >> Acked-by: Nicolas Chautru <nicolas.chautru@intel.com>
> > [...]
> >>> Baseband API - EXPERIMENTAL
> >>> M: Nicolas Chautru <nicolas.chautru@intel.com>
> >>> +R: Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com>
> > I don't understand the need of differenciating maintainer and reviewer.
> > If you are trusted enough, why not just being co-maintainer?
> >
> I want to help out with the reviews, the reviewer type makes clear this level of commitment.
>
> Maintainer is the next, higher level of commitment.
>
>
> Trust wise, this would allow the maintainer verify the reviewer does have the bandwidth to be responsive
>
> and effective before committing to sharing responsibility.
Sorry I fail to understand.
My understanding is that you want to be Cc
but not committing for responsibility.
Would it be the same if you create a mail filter on your side?
This model is really not clear to me so I'm reluctant to add
such new category until I understand the benefit.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-10-02 15:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-10-01 14:30 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] maintainers: New Reviewer entry type added to MAINTAINERS trix
2020-10-01 21:22 ` Chautru, Nicolas
2020-10-01 21:54 ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-10-02 14:59 ` Tom Rix
2020-10-02 15:41 ` Thomas Monjalon [this message]
2020-10-02 16:35 ` Tom Rix
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1985785.NsDeZ6iOcB@thomas \
--to=thomas@monjalon.net \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=nicolas.chautru@intel.com \
--cc=trix@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.