From: Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: <jon.maloy@ericsson.com>, <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
<tipc-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net>, <ying.xue@windriver.com>,
<erik.hugne@ericsson.com>, <allan.stephens@windriver.com>,
<maloy@donjonn.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] TIPC: Removing EXPERIMENTAL label
Date: Fri, 25 May 2012 15:05:06 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120525190506.GB25102@windriver.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120524.161231.1058511318935925082.davem@davemloft.net>
[Re: [PATCH 1/3] TIPC: Removing EXPERIMENTAL label] On 24/05/2012 (Thu 16:12) David Miller wrote:
> From: Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com>
> Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 15:58:16 -0400
>
> > But for new TIPC development features, future direction, and things like
> > that -- making the right call requires intimate understanding of TIPC
> > and its users, which is something that a maintainer should have but
> > something I know I don't have. (A man has to know his limitations.)
> >
> > In this context, I'm not talking about these three trivial patches; but
> > more complicated stuff that I imagine will be floated in the future.
> >
> > To that end, I can still review and call out issues in a crap patch when
> > I see them. But I'd like to see new stuff sent to netdev, so that folks
> > smarter than me have a chance to catch when a patch appears generally OK
> > but is architecturally the wrong direction etc.
>
> For maintainership, taste is more important than deep knowledge of the
> specific technology. Worst case you ask the submitter to explain the
> background of their change more thoroughly and that information is an
> absolutely requirement in the commit message and code comments
> anyways.
OK, what I'm hearing is that you'd prefer I continue to collect up TIPC
patches and issue pull requests for a while longer. I can do that. Any
specifics of how you'd like things done? -- e.g. if the reviews of new
TIPC development patches takes place here on netdev before I stage them,
will that create extra work for you dealing with them in patchworks?
Paul.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-05-25 19:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-05-21 5:59 [PATCH 1/3] TIPC: Removing EXPERIMENTAL label Jon Maloy
2012-05-21 5:59 ` [PATCH 2/3] TIPC: Adding new developers to maintainers list Jon Maloy
2012-05-21 6:37 ` David Miller
2012-05-21 5:59 ` [PATCH 3/3] TIPC: Stepping TIPC version to 2.1.0 Jon Maloy
2012-05-21 6:40 ` David Miller
2012-05-21 6:39 ` [PATCH 1/3] TIPC: Removing EXPERIMENTAL label David Miller
2012-05-24 19:58 ` Paul Gortmaker
2012-05-24 20:12 ` David Miller
2012-05-25 19:05 ` Paul Gortmaker [this message]
2012-05-25 20:24 ` David Miller
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=20120525190506.GB25102@windriver.com \
--to=paul.gortmaker@windriver.com \
--cc=allan.stephens@windriver.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=erik.hugne@ericsson.com \
--cc=jon.maloy@ericsson.com \
--cc=maloy@donjonn.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tipc-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=ying.xue@windriver.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.