From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from list by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.71) id 1dfkeq-0006MY-3k for mharc-qemu-trivial@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Aug 2017 06:25:40 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39050) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dfken-0006Kc-Qg for qemu-trivial@nongnu.org; Thu, 10 Aug 2017 06:25:39 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dfkem-0007Ip-Mj for qemu-trivial@nongnu.org; Thu, 10 Aug 2017 06:25:37 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:42980) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dfkef-0007G2-OT; Thu, 10 Aug 2017 06:25:29 -0400 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 84DEC7CE0E; Thu, 10 Aug 2017 10:25:28 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com 84DEC7CE0E Authentication-Results: ext-mx04.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: ext-mx04.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=cohuck@redhat.com Received: from gondolin (ovpn-117-6.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.117.6]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61D1B97835; Thu, 10 Aug 2017 10:25:23 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2017 12:25:20 +0200 From: Cornelia Huck To: Peter Maydell Cc: Philippe =?UTF-8?B?TWF0aGlldS1EYXVkw6k=?= , Alex =?UTF-8?B?QmVubsOpZQ==?= , Eric Blake , Fam Zheng , Paolo Bonzini , Richard Henderson , QEMU Trivial , QEMU Developers , Markus Armbruster , "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" Message-ID: <20170810122520.48403984.cohuck@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20170728053610.15770-1-f4bug@amsat.org> <20170728053610.15770-19-f4bug@amsat.org> <87mv7aumav.fsf@linaro.org> <8e2e3aa5-4459-76ba-3309-af6b30220346@amsat.org> <87fud0vmak.fsf@linaro.org> <3e66742f-04c5-51b7-de3a-f692c0637bc5@amsat.org> <20170810104604.342af354.cohuck@redhat.com> Organization: Red Hat GmbH MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.12 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.28]); Thu, 10 Aug 2017 10:25:28 +0000 (UTC) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 209.132.183.28 Subject: Re: [Qemu-trivial] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 18/47] MAINTAINERS: add missing TCG entry X-BeenThere: qemu-trivial@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2017 10:25:39 -0000 On Thu, 10 Aug 2017 10:22:54 +0100 Peter Maydell wrote: > On 10 August 2017 at 09:46, Cornelia Huck wrote: > > The root problem is "some files have no maintainers". The reasons range > > from "forgot to include the file in the pattern" (easily fixed), over > > "file is updated via a script" (the linux-headers case), to "nobody > > feels up to the task" (which is the worst case). > > > > In most cases, I don't think the recent contributors list is very > > helpful. Somebody who simply did a tree-wide rename is unlikely to be > > able to make a good judgment about a complicated logic change. Just > > printing qemu-devel as the address to send this to is probably better; > > unfortunately, it may cause patches to languish on the list if nobody > > takes pity on them. > > > > Do we need someone collecting non-trivial patches like that, who either > > pesters others or picks up the patches themselves? > > The problem is that if nobody's feeling up to the task of taking > on a particular single file which has no maintainer, then it's > definitely true that nobody's going to feel up to taking on > the entire collection of unmaintained files... > > I think the UI (giving no consideration to how we might implement > this!) would ideally be something like: > * if anybody mails a patch which touches an "unmaintained" file, > a robot should send a reply along the lines of "thanks for the > patch; unfortunately file X is not maintained so it may be > tricky to get patch review for this. You'll need to be > persistent and do more of the legwork than if you were patching > a file that did have an active maintainer" so contributors > know when they've wandered into the swamp That's a good idea. > * some mechanism for easily finding patches to unmaintained > files which haven't got review yet, so that anybody with some > spare time and interest can move some of them along (the idea > being to spread the load rather than trying to designate a > particular "owner" for this headache) Can maybe patchew set a special flag for patches that only touch unmaintained files? > * ditto for finding patches to unmaintained files which have got > review but which haven't been committed > > thanks > -- PMM From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39005) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dfkel-0006JE-4j for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 10 Aug 2017 06:25:36 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dfkeg-0007GT-15 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 10 Aug 2017 06:25:34 -0400 Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2017 12:25:20 +0200 From: Cornelia Huck Message-ID: <20170810122520.48403984.cohuck@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20170728053610.15770-1-f4bug@amsat.org> <20170728053610.15770-19-f4bug@amsat.org> <87mv7aumav.fsf@linaro.org> <8e2e3aa5-4459-76ba-3309-af6b30220346@amsat.org> <87fud0vmak.fsf@linaro.org> <3e66742f-04c5-51b7-de3a-f692c0637bc5@amsat.org> <20170810104604.342af354.cohuck@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 18/47] MAINTAINERS: add missing TCG entry List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Maydell Cc: Philippe =?UTF-8?B?TWF0aGlldS1EYXVkw6k=?= , Alex =?UTF-8?B?QmVubsOpZQ==?= , Eric Blake , Fam Zheng , Paolo Bonzini , Richard Henderson , QEMU Trivial , QEMU Developers , Markus Armbruster , "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" On Thu, 10 Aug 2017 10:22:54 +0100 Peter Maydell wrote: > On 10 August 2017 at 09:46, Cornelia Huck wrote: > > The root problem is "some files have no maintainers". The reasons range > > from "forgot to include the file in the pattern" (easily fixed), over > > "file is updated via a script" (the linux-headers case), to "nobody > > feels up to the task" (which is the worst case). > > > > In most cases, I don't think the recent contributors list is very > > helpful. Somebody who simply did a tree-wide rename is unlikely to be > > able to make a good judgment about a complicated logic change. Just > > printing qemu-devel as the address to send this to is probably better; > > unfortunately, it may cause patches to languish on the list if nobody > > takes pity on them. > > > > Do we need someone collecting non-trivial patches like that, who either > > pesters others or picks up the patches themselves? > > The problem is that if nobody's feeling up to the task of taking > on a particular single file which has no maintainer, then it's > definitely true that nobody's going to feel up to taking on > the entire collection of unmaintained files... > > I think the UI (giving no consideration to how we might implement > this!) would ideally be something like: > * if anybody mails a patch which touches an "unmaintained" file, > a robot should send a reply along the lines of "thanks for the > patch; unfortunately file X is not maintained so it may be > tricky to get patch review for this. You'll need to be > persistent and do more of the legwork than if you were patching > a file that did have an active maintainer" so contributors > know when they've wandered into the swamp That's a good idea. > * some mechanism for easily finding patches to unmaintained > files which haven't got review yet, so that anybody with some > spare time and interest can move some of them along (the idea > being to spread the load rather than trying to designate a > particular "owner" for this headache) Can maybe patchew set a special flag for patches that only touch unmaintained files? > * ditto for finding patches to unmaintained files which have got > review but which haven't been committed > > thanks > -- PMM