Re: [ANN] Media Summit September 16th: Final Agenda (v7)

[Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>]

Hi Mauro,

On Wed, Sep 18, 2024 at 01:23:23PM +0200, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> Em Wed, 18 Sep 2024 11:30:20 +0200 Sebastian Fricke escreveu:
> > On 18.09.2024 09:24, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> > > Em Tue, 17 Sep 2024 14:52:19 +0200 Hans Verkuil escreveu:
> > >> On 9/17/24 11:17 AM, Sebastian Fricke wrote:  
> > >> > Greetings,
> > >> >
> > >> > I remember that we wanted to still define a couple of processes for the
> > >> > multi-committer model for which we hadn't have the time on the media
> > >> > summit. Just would like to gather who would be interested to meet for
> > >> > that, where we meet (probably LPC venue) and when (Laurent just told me
> > >> > that Friday is probably a good slot for that).  
> > >>
> > >> Can you refresh my memory which processes need more work?  
> > 
> > Well I basically remember that we had a bunch of topics in our meetings
> > that we wanted to skip in order to talk about them here.
> > We looked at the documentation from DRM and wanted to think about
> > equivalent policies for media.
> > https://drm.pages.freedesktop.org/maintainer-tools/committer/committer-drm-misc.html#where-do-i-apply-my-patch
> 
> Thanks for the pointer. Yeah, examples from other trees can be helpful when
> improving media developers profile and writing the committers agreement,
> even when they have a message that it is just the opposite of what we
> we want, like this (from DRM-misc ruleset):
> 
> 	"Since even a broken driver is more useful than no driver minimal
> 	 review standards are a lot lower."
> 
> In this particular case, for instance, as discussed at media summit, we'd
> like to have high quality standards for stuff under drivers/media. After
> all, we do use drivers/media/staging for low quality drivers. 
> 
> It it worth mentioning that committers shall not merge low quality drivers
> nor patches for staging. If ever needed, those should be done via PRs or
> be explicitly authorized by maintainers.

Do you mean new drivers only, or also patches for existing staging/
drivers ?

> > Also there were topics like how to handle backports. 
> 
> We don't handle backports on media tree. This is up to stable maintainers.
> Basically, we follow stable rules to the letter:
> 
> 	Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst
> 
> E. g. patches that require backports shall have the proper meta-tags 
> (specially cc: stable and  fixes:). 

Sebastian may have meant backmerges.

> Also, we're not implementing multi-committers for fixes, just for next.
> 
> So, fixes shall follow the normal flow: they should be sent via PR.

I see there's a fixes branch in the media-committers tree, does that
mean you have agreed with Hans and Ricardo that fixes will go through
pull requests but be pushed there for visibility ? If so, thanks for
that, I think it will improve the experience.

> > > I have the same doubt. As discussed during the summit, Hans and I had some
> > > discussions yesterday, to address a few details. For both of us the process
> > > sounds well defined.  
> > 
> > I know that we scraped a lot of topics in the meeting at the media
> > summit and I am not sure about the scope you discussed with Ricardo
> > yesterday. So, we don't have to meet if you feel like we covered
> > everything, just wanted to use the opportunity as long as we are all in
> > the same place.
> 
> I guess we covered everything that are needed for now. If required,
> further discussions may happen later via e-mail and/or virtual meetings.

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart