Patchwork and em28xx delegates

Patchwork and em28xx delegates

[Frank Schäfer]

I've just noticed that my 2 pending em28xx patches have got delegate
assigned:

https://patchwork.linuxtv.org/patch/17834/
=> delegated to mkrufky

https://patchwork.linuxtv.org/patch/17928/     (Obsoleted)
=> delegated to hverkuil

Ist this a patchwork failure or is the new submaintainers workflow the
reason ?

Regards,
Frank

Re: Patchwork and em28xx delegates

[Mauro Carvalho Chehab]

Em Mon, 15 Apr 2013 18:41:44 +0200
Frank Schäfer <fschaefer.oss@googlemail.com> escreveu:

> I've just noticed that my 2 pending em28xx patches have got delegate
> assigned:
> 
> https://patchwork.linuxtv.org/patch/17834/
> => delegated to mkrufky
> 
> https://patchwork.linuxtv.org/patch/17928/     (Obsoleted)
> => delegated to hverkuil
> 
> Ist this a patchwork failure or is the new submaintainers workflow the
> reason ?

Sub-maintainers workflow. We expect that most patches will be applied via 
one of the sub-maintainers. That will likely improve Kernel's quality and
help to reduce the maintainers overload.

-- 

Cheers,
Mauro

Re: Patchwork and em28xx delegates

[Frank Schäfer]

Am 15.04.2013 18:50, schrieb Mauro Carvalho Chehab:
> Em Mon, 15 Apr 2013 18:41:44 +0200
> Frank Schäfer <fschaefer.oss@googlemail.com> escreveu:
>
>> I've just noticed that my 2 pending em28xx patches have got delegate
>> assigned:
>>
>> https://patchwork.linuxtv.org/patch/17834/
>> => delegated to mkrufky
>>
>> https://patchwork.linuxtv.org/patch/17928/     (Obsoleted)
>> => delegated to hverkuil
>>
>> Ist this a patchwork failure or is the new submaintainers workflow the
>> reason ?
> Sub-maintainers workflow. We expect that most patches will be applied via 
> one of the sub-maintainers. That will likely improve Kernel's quality and
> help to reduce the maintainers overload.

How is the em28xx driver split betweend the submaintainers ?
Where should I send em28xx patches in the future ? You are still the
em28xx maintainer, right ?

Regards,
Frank

Re: Patchwork and em28xx delegates

[Mauro Carvalho Chehab]

Em Mon, 15 Apr 2013 23:02:51 +0200
Frank Schäfer <fschaefer.oss@googlemail.com> escreveu:

> Am 15.04.2013 18:50, schrieb Mauro Carvalho Chehab:
> > Em Mon, 15 Apr 2013 18:41:44 +0200
> > Frank Schäfer <fschaefer.oss@googlemail.com> escreveu:
> >
> >> I've just noticed that my 2 pending em28xx patches have got delegate
> >> assigned:
> >>
> >> https://patchwork.linuxtv.org/patch/17834/
> >> => delegated to mkrufky
> >>
> >> https://patchwork.linuxtv.org/patch/17928/     (Obsoleted)
> >> => delegated to hverkuil
> >>
> >> Ist this a patchwork failure or is the new submaintainers workflow the
> >> reason ?
> > Sub-maintainers workflow. We expect that most patches will be applied via 
> > one of the sub-maintainers. That will likely improve Kernel's quality and
> > help to reduce the maintainers overload.
> 
> How is the em28xx driver split betweend the submaintainers ?

Analog part => Hans
Tuners, demods  => Mkrufky

> Where should I send em28xx patches in the future ? 

To the same place: linux-media@vger.kernel.org.

> You are still the em28xx maintainer, right ?

Currently, I only wear the driver maintainer's hat when there's no other people
looking into it, or when the patches would affect something that I'm working
with.

The advantage is that a patch get more reviews, with is good.

Btw, em28xx is not auto-delegated. If it was received such delegation,
it is likely because either Hans or Michael (or both) decided to add
reviewing your patches on their todo list.

Of course, if are there any dependency between the three patches in this
series, that means that the entire 3 patch series will needed to be
merged into just one sub-maintainers tree.

Cheers,
Mauro

Re: Patchwork and em28xx delegates

[Michael Krufky]

I see this https://patchwork.linuxtv.org/patch/17834/ is delegated to
me.  If I took ownership myself then it may have been a mistake.

Either way, the patch looks good to me and makes sense, but I am not
maintaining em28xx.  Mauro, if you want to go ahead and merge his
patch then it's fine with me.  Since this was a mistake, I don't plan
to push it from my own repository.

Reviewed-by: Michael Krufky <mkrufky@linuxtv.org>