Re: A modest proposal -- We need a patch penguin

Stuart Young
2002-01-30T01:32:54Z

At 08:18 PM 29/01/02 -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 12:00:11PM +1100, Stuart Young wrote:
> > Perhaps it's time we set up a specific lkml-patch mailing list, and leave
>
>I like the suggestion (most recently, of Daniel? pardon if I
>miscredit) of having patches-2.[45]@vger.kernel.org type addresses,
>which would archive patches, and have a high noise-to-signal ratio.
>Maybe even filter out all non-patches.
>
>The big issue I cannot decide upon is whether standard e-mails should be
> To: torvalds@
> CC: patches-2.4@
>or just
> To: patches-2.4@
>
>(I'm guessing Linus would prefer the first, but who knows)

Perhaps it'd be easier for patches-2.4 to actually send a copy to whoever
is the relevant maintainer of a "section" (which could be worked out from
the path in the patch, as long as it's made relevant to linux/) as well as
the 2.4 maintainer? There is a lot of things that can be done here.

>Also, something noone has mentioned is out-of-band patches. Security
>fixes and other patches which for various reasons go straight to Linus.

Perhaps that is a good use for my lkml-patches idea, which gives those who
have no avenue a place to post patches so they get picked up.

Something that does need to be done is that various directories under the
kernel tree need to have someone "who receives patches" for that part, and
who forwards them onto the kernel maintainer (eg: Linus, Marcello, etc) for
further review/inclusion/rejection. This way, anything that doesn't fall
under a particular maintainer gets sectioned off to someone, so it does get
review, and hopefully a reply.

Stuart Young - sgy@amc.com.au
(aka Cefiar) - cefiar1@optushome.com.au

[All opinions expressed in the above message are my]
[own and not necessarily the views of my employer..]