Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [PATCH] media: add a subsystem profile documentation

Doug Anderson
2019-09-23T15:58:44Z

Hi,

On Sat, Sep 21, 2019 at 1:56 AM Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 20 Sep 2019, Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 7:54 AM Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com> wrote:
> >> And remove Kees Cook and Colin King ? :-) Jokes aside, brushing up
> >> get_maintainer.pl a bit is a good idea. I'm for instance not sure adding
> >> LKML automatically is a good idea if other mailing lists are already
> >> CC'ed, as it's a bit of a /dev/null (albeit with logging, so CC'ing it
> >> when no other mailing list is appropriate certainly makes sense).
> >
> > Please don't do this, as it means the patch won't be findable on the
> > "LKML" patchwork instance at:
> >
> > https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/project/lkml/list/
> >
> > Having LKML copied on all patches is also nice because it makes it
> > easier to respond to a patch that was posted to a list you didn't
> > subscribe to. I subscribe to LKML and have it redirected to a folder
> > that I never look at. Then if I want to find an email thread I can
> > search that folder and easily respond from within my normal email
> > client.
> >
> > Is there any downside to CCing LKML?
>
> I think the question becomes, do we want *everything* posted to LKML?

I swear that I was involved in a conversation in the past where
someone suggested to stop CCing LKML on patches and Jonathan Corbet
jumped in and said that he supported CCing LKML on all patches. I
searched for that conversation and couldn't find it, so it's possible
I dreamed it. Maybe he can confirm?

> For example, based on the last 30 days, the kernel the monthly addition
> to LKML traffic from my corner of the kernel would be in this ballpark:
>
> $ notmuch count date:30d.. to:intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org or to:dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org and not to linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org and subject:PATCH
> 96904
>
> OTOH LKML is already a firehose that's impossible to drink from, so not
> much difference there...

Right. At this point I think LKML is just useful as a dumping ground
and not a place to look for patches or conversations without filters.
It feels fine to keep using it that way. Having another list (like
ksummit-discuss) for conversations with a higher signal-to-noise ratio
seems like a fine way forward to me.

-Doug