Re: Reducing the noise level of build error notifications to 0

[Fengguang Wu <wfg@linux.intel.com>]

On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 08:27:20AM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 12:20:10PM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> > > > How about also cc: not only the author where you mention it above, but
> > > > everyone who signed-off on the patch?  That would provide a bit of peer
> > > > pressure to ensure that the problems get fixed.
> > > 
> > > That's (interesting and) good point. If me understand you right:
> > > 
> > > - TO: author, CC: Signed-off-by, CC: (sub-)subsystem mailing list
> > >   for build errors
> > > 
> > > - TO: author, CC: Signed-off-by (but sure, remove the top level busy maintainers)
> > >   for gcc warnings
> 
> Well, if I sign-off on a patch, I want to know about gcc warnings that
> were added by it, don't not email me just because you think I'm busy.

OK :)

> > Or, just remove the committer from CC: and add Reviewed-by to CC: 
> > By reviewing, one should already be familiar with the patch.
> 
> I don't think you should drop the committer, but maybe that's just me.

Understand. Let's default to CC all signers and committer.

> > > - TO: author
> > >   for sparse warnings (however I'm still too afraid to enable sparse checks)
> 
> This might get tougher in some areas of the kernel like the
> drivers/staging/ tree where people incrementally fix things up, like fix
> trailing space issues on one patch, which doesn't change the rest of the
> line that might have had coding style or sparse issues in it.  That's
> why I can't always run checkpatch.pl on patches sent to me, and why
> sparse might not help out.

Ah got it.

> But, I'd love to see sparse run on other areas of the kernel (i.e.
> anything not in drivers/staging/) hopefully it would get those areas
> fixed up properly.

Sure, I can blacklist the staging tree and still do sparse
notifications for others.

Thanks,
Fengguang