From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754521AbaFCVsR (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Jun 2014 17:48:17 -0400 Received: from e39.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.160]:49272 "EHLO e39.co.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754169AbaFCVsQ (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Jun 2014 17:48:16 -0400 Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2014 14:48:09 -0700 From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: Joe Perches Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@kernel.org, laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com, josh@joshtriplett.org, niv@us.ibm.com, tglx@linutronix.de, peterz@infradead.org, rostedt@goodmis.org, dhowells@redhat.com, edumazet@google.com, dvhart@linux.intel.com, fweisbec@gmail.com, oleg@redhat.com, sbw@mit.edu Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 RFC 1/3] MAINTAINERS: Add "R:" designated-reviewers tag Message-ID: <20140603214809.GX22231@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reply-To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com References: <1401809736-12023-1-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1401822187.18833.24.camel@joe-AO725> <20140603201202.GW22231@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1401826567.22133.2.camel@joe-AO725> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1401826567.22133.2.camel@joe-AO725> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-TM-AS-MML: disable X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 14060321-9332-0000-0000-000000FC4B6F Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 01:16:07PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > On Tue, 2014-06-03 at 13:12 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 12:03:07PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > > > On Tue, 2014-06-03 at 08:35 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > Paul Walmsley also noted the need for patch > > > > submitters to know who the key reviewers are and suggested adding an > > > > "R:" tag to the MAINTAINERS file to record this information on a > > > > per-subsystem basis. > > > [] > > > > diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS > > > [] > > > > @@ -70,6 +70,8 @@ Descriptions of section entries: > > > > > > > > P: Person (obsolete) > > > > M: Mail patches to: FullName > > > > + R: Designated reviewer, who should be CCed on patches, > > > > + format: FullName > > > > L: Mailing list that is relevant to this area > > > > W: Web-page with status/info > > > > Q: Patchwork web based patch tracking system site > > > > > > Perhaps the M: and R: roles should be more fully > > > described here. > > > > > > The R: entry description doesn't need commas. > > > > > > Maybe something like: > > > M: Maintainer (to:) FullName > > > R: Reviewer (cc:) FullName > > > > This is arguably better organized, but I need to keep my focus on adding > > the designated reviewer. I am not in a position to undertake a rewrite > > of the MAINTAINER file preamble at this point. > > That's silly, you're adding the "R" entry. > Add a proper description for it. I will take another look at R: in a few days and possibly wordsmith it. > > > You might as well send the get_maintainer update with this > > > series too. > > > > Interesting... Who is the maintainer for get_maintainer? ;-) > > Some numbskull just signed up for that. > > He suggests you keep all the patches that add > support for this "R: reviewer" feature together. My reluctance is due to the fact that this will change how newbies submit patches. But if we get a few Acked-by or Reviewed-by responses from high-level maintainers (Linus, Greg, Ingo, Thomas, Peter, Ted, Dave, Ben, ...), I will of course be happy to queue it. Thanx, Paul