From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Phillip Lougher <phillip.lougher@gmail.com>
Cc: Vyacheslav Dubeyko <slava@dubeyko.com>,
richard -rw- weinberger <richard.weinberger@gmail.com>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
squashfs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
Vyacheslav.Dubeyko@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [squashfs] Who is responsible for code review?
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 19:52:11 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120623025211.GA18260@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAB3wodfkoXqqvCj-mTMeaMrt1fTs2-+kTNpnkjj=bzpj+4_f+Q@mail.gmail.com>
On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 03:01:27AM +0100, Phillip Lougher wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 11:53 AM, Vyacheslav Dubeyko <slava@dubeyko.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> >> We have a script to answer such questions.
> >> scripts/get_maintainer.pl
> >>
> > Ok. Thanks. :-)
> >
> > I know that Phillip Lougher is the maintainer of squashfs file system
> > code. But he keeps silence during last time. It was patch from UCHINO
> > Satoshi recently but nobody said YES or NO on it. My question is about
> > such situation.
> >
>
> Vyacheslav
>
> You wrote "but nobody said YES or NO on it", and effectively answered
> your own question. The silence has been waiting for
> feedback/code-review on these patches from others.
>
> The patches in question are adding a new feature to Squashfs. New
> features are always nice to have, but always carry the risk of
> introducing bugs, performance regressions, and generally making the
> code harder to maintain if (as is the case with these patches) they
> have been implemented in a way not to my liking.
>
> I reviewed these patches when they arrived, and I got a poor opinion
> of them. However, I decided to give the patches a chance, and wait
> and see what feedback/code-review they got. So far they have received
> nothing.
That's not a good way to do review comments. If you review them, let
the author know about your poor opinion. That gives them, and others,
the chance to change your opinion if others feel you are incorrect, or,
if you are correct, it lets the author know they need to change their
code.
Just doing nothing publically doesn't help anyone out here, and only
causes confusion as this thread shows.
I read over these patches a while ago and offered some review, which I
see has been taken into consideration and changes were made. Please let
us know your opinion so that we can all get something that works for
everyone accepted here.
thanks,
greg k-h
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-06-23 2:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-06-22 7:15 [squashfs] Who is responsible for code review? Vyacheslav Dubeyko
2012-06-22 10:30 ` richard -rw- weinberger
2012-06-22 10:53 ` Vyacheslav Dubeyko
2012-06-23 2:01 ` Phillip Lougher
2012-06-23 2:52 ` Greg KH [this message]
2012-06-23 12:24 ` [Squashfs-devel] " Peter Korsgaard
2012-06-23 0:25 ` Phillip Lougher
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=20120623025211.GA18260@kroah.com \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=Vyacheslav.Dubeyko@huawei.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=phillip.lougher@gmail.com \
--cc=richard.weinberger@gmail.com \
--cc=slava@dubeyko.com \
--cc=squashfs-devel@lists.sourceforge.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.