From: Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de>
To: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xenotime.net>
Cc: "John W. Linville" <linville@tuxdriver.com>,
Olivier Galibert <galibert@pobox.com>,
Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>,
devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: What's the staging review and acceptance process?
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2010 13:17:48 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100422201748.GB26924@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4BD0AC38.3090803@xenotime.net>
On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 01:06:16PM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> John W. Linville wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 08:42:45AM +0200, Olivier Galibert wrote:
> >> On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 11:12:42PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 10:55:18PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> >>>> Not really, patchwork shows status immediately.
> >>> Immediately when someone does something with it, right? So, the same as
> >>> my development cycle?
> >> I guess the main difference is that patchwork allows one contributor
> >> to see that his patch has just not been checked yet, vs. missed/lost.
> >
> > In Greg's defense, I find patchwork to be fairly unwieldy (which is
> > why I don't use it). It is certainly possible that I am missing some
> > key feature, but my limited experience with it suggested to me that all
> > the clicky-clicky stuff required to deal with the individual messages
> > queued in patchwork nearly doubled my time overhead associated with
> > merging patches.
>
>
> Just from a patch submitter perspective, I'd like to see some kind of
> response. I can believe what you say about patchwork, so I wouldn't
> advocate it.
>
> I agree to Joe's perspective that Greg is overbooked regarding time.
> I think that this is an ongoing problem, not just a current one that
> will go away, so for me, the question is what is Greg willing to do
> about it?
Greg is not going to take up 3 months of his life and sell and buy a
house and move.
Seriously, that took up all of my "free" time, and it's now over, and I
am catching up on things, give me a short ammount of time please.
thanks,
greg k-h
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-04-22 20:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-04-21 20:32 What's the staging review and acceptance process? Joe Perches
2010-04-22 3:45 ` Greg KH
2010-04-22 4:25 ` Joe Perches
2010-04-22 5:49 ` Greg KH
2010-04-22 5:55 ` Joe Perches
2010-04-22 6:12 ` Greg KH
2010-04-22 6:28 ` Joe Perches
2010-04-22 6:35 ` Jaya Kumar
2010-04-22 6:42 ` Olivier Galibert
2010-04-22 19:58 ` John W. Linville
2010-04-22 20:06 ` Randy Dunlap
2010-04-22 20:17 ` Greg KH [this message]
2010-04-22 9:25 ` Stefan Richter
2010-04-22 9:17 ` Alan Cox
2010-04-22 20:18 ` Greg KH
2010-04-22 22:46 ` Willy Tarreau
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=20100422201748.GB26924@suse.de \
--to=gregkh@suse.de \
--cc=devel@driverdev.osuosl.org \
--cc=galibert@pobox.com \
--cc=joe@perches.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linville@tuxdriver.com \
--cc=rdunlap@xenotime.net \
/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.