From: Rob Landley <rob@landley.net>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: torvalds@transmeta.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Documentation/SendingPatches [1 of 2].
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 16:14:52 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200306111615.03512.rob@landley.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200306111417.24269.rob@landley.net>
Two patches to Documentation/SendingPatches.
This one moves "Include PATCH in the subject" earlier in the to-do list,
and adds two new items: "Follow the chain (or 'why is Linus ignoring me')",
and "Listen to feedback".
It's against 2.5.70.
Changes since last version: two typos fixed (s/Lieutanant/Lieutenant), and
"log rolling" comments into seperate patch, on general principles.
Rob
--- linux-2.5.70/Documentation/SubmittingPatches 2003-05-26 21:00:20.000000000 -0400
+++ linux-new/Documentation/SubmittingPatches 2003-06-11 15:54:29.000000000 -0400
@@ -175,9 +175,14 @@
If the patch does not apply cleanly to the latest kernel version,
Linus will not apply it.
+9) Include PATCH in the subject
+Due to high e-mail traffic to Linus, and to linux-kernel, it is common
+convention to prefix your subject line with [PATCH]. This lets Linus
+and other kernel developers more easily distinguish patches from other
+e-mail discussions.
-9) Don't get discouraged. Re-submit.
+10) Don't get discouraged. Re-submit.
After you have submitted your change, be patient and wait. If Linus
likes your change and applies it, it will appear in the next version
@@ -201,16 +206,56 @@
When in doubt, solicit comments on linux-kernel mailing list.
+11) Follow the chain (or "Why is Linus ignoring me?")
-
-10) Include PATCH in the subject
-
-Due to high e-mail traffic to Linus, and to linux-kernel, it is common
-convention to prefix your subject line with [PATCH]. This lets Linus
-and other kernel developers more easily distinguish patches from other
-e-mail discussions.
-
-
+These days, Linus is too overwhelmed to reliably accept patches directly
+from developers he doesn't know. Furthermore, Linus is unlikely to respond
+to unsolicited email, since he gets so much of it he reads most with the
+delete key. If your patch is being repeatedly ignored, resending it more than
+a few times can get frustrating. There's a better way.
+
+The slow but steady way to get patches into the development kernel is a three
+step process:
+
+ A) Get the maintainer's approval.
+ B) Get the subsystem lieutenant's approval.
+ C) Get it to Linus.
+
+The maintainer is listed in the MAINTAINERS file. This is the first person
+you should approach with your patch, as they're the only ones who owe you
+any kind of response if they've never heard of you before. (Notice they
+do not owe you a _polite_ response. Be nice.)
+
+Maintainers report to lieutenants, which are like subsystem maintainers.
+There are over a hundred maintainers, but only about a dozen lieutenants.
+They're not listed anywhere, but the maintainer you contact should know who
+they report to. (If the maintainer doesn't respond after a week or so,
+you could try asking on linux kernel.) The maintainer may take your patch
+and forward it on themselves, or sign off on it and send you on to the
+appropriate lieutenant with their blessing but not their spare time.
+
+Lieutenants report to Linus. They're the only people who can ding him
+for not answering their email. Linus responds fairly reliably to his
+lieutenants, lieutenants respond to maintainers, and maintainers should
+respond to you. If you follow the chain, at each stage you will be talking
+to somebody who more or less owes you an answer, even if that answer is "no".
+
+The farther away from Linus people are, the more time they're likely to have
+to respond to your email. The response may be "no, that's a bad idea", but
+it's better than being left hanging.
+
+11) Listen to feedback.
+
+If a maintainer, lieutenant, or Linus tells you something specific is wrong
+with your patch, this is a GOOD thing. It means you've been given the
+opportunity to fix it. It's not meant to be discouraging, if they wanted to
+discourage you they'd either ignore you or explicitly tell you to stop
+bothering them.
+
+If Linus himself replies to you by telling you your patch has something wrong
+with it, you have just been encouraged. Same goes for lieutenants and
+maintainers. When they tell you what you need to do to make the thing
+palatable to them, you've been given the opportunity to fix it and resubmit.
-----------------------------------
SECTION 2 - HINTS, TIPS, AND TRICKS
prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-06-11 19:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-06-11 18:17 [PATCH] Documentation tweak to SendingPatches Rob Landley
2003-06-11 20:14 ` Rob Landley [this message]
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=200306111615.03512.rob@landley.net \
--to=rob@landley.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@transmeta.com \
/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