From: mzoran@crowfest.net (Michael Zoran)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: extend Raspberry Pi entry
Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2017 14:02:04 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1485727324.30797.7.camel@crowfest.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170129215253.hwhwsqoulhmjxs55@tarshish>
On Sun, 2017-01-29 at 23:52 +0200, Baruch Siach wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 29, 2017 at 01:41:49PM -0800, Michael Zoran wrote:
> > On Sun, 2017-01-29 at 23:06 +0200, Baruch Siach wrote:
> > > Kernel development is email based. See "Why kernel development
> > > still
> > > uses? email"[1]. What would you like to see improved?
> >
> > No offense to any of the maintainers, but the e-mail system is
> > optimized for a very large number of very, very small changes. It
> > isn't
> > optimized for large changes.? In a way it tends to discourage any
> > kind
> > of big improvements.
> >
> > The idea of checking in a very large number of small patches makes
> > sense for auditing.? And yes having both isn't totally possible, so
> > I
> > don't know really where the line should go between the two.? But
> > taking
> > things to one extreme or the other doesn't make sense either.
>
> In extreme cases like the examples below sending email patches
> doesn't make?
> sense, so direct git pulls can be used instead. But these cases are
> quite?
> rare.
>
> Commit 07a8c03f3e0 (ARM: reduce defconfigs) shortstat is:
>
> ?177 files changed, 652 insertions(+), 194157 deletions(-)
>
> Commit 607ca46e97 (UAPI: (Scripted) Disintegrate include/linux)
> shortstat is:
>
> ?578 files changed, 32659 insertions(+), 30108 deletions(-)
Pulls make sense, but perhaps a concept of a pull that only allows a
subtree to be modified makes sense.
Perhaps you have some idiot that doesn't know what they are doing. If
you confine their changes to a certain directory, in theory it would
limit that amount of damage that could be done(to a certain extent).
At the very minimum, I would think that hardware specific drivers
should be handled differently then core drivers or non-platform
specific drivers.
I mean really, why should the vendor of the RPI have to deal with a
gazillion requests to change the default built configuration.
But then again, having everything in one tree makes it easy to make
sure everything can be rebuilt from a clean build...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-01-29 22:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-01-29 20:08 [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: extend Raspberry Pi entry Baruch Siach
2017-01-29 20:52 ` Michael Zoran
2017-01-29 21:06 ` Baruch Siach
2017-01-29 21:41 ` Michael Zoran
2017-01-29 21:52 ` Baruch Siach
2017-01-29 22:02 ` Michael Zoran [this message]
2017-01-29 22:24 ` Michael Zoran
2017-01-30 7:56 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2017-01-30 8:09 ` Michael Zoran
2017-01-30 8:51 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2017-01-30 9:01 ` Michael Zoran
2017-01-29 21:06 ` Stefan Wahren
2017-01-29 21:25 ` Michael Zoran
2017-01-30 17:03 ` Stephen Warren
2017-01-31 19:49 ` Eric Anholt
2017-02-01 5:21 ` Stephen Warren
2017-02-01 19:51 ` Eric Anholt
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=1485727324.30797.7.camel@crowfest.net \
--to=mzoran@crowfest.net \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).