Re: [PATCH RFC 1/2] MAINTAINERS: Add "R:" designated-reviewers tag

[Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>]

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> To: josh@joshtriplett.org
> Cc: "Joe Perches" <joe@perches.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@kernel.org, laijs@cn.fujitsu.com,
> dipankar@in.ibm.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, "mathieu desnoyers" <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
> niv@us.ibm.com, tglx@linutronix.de, peterz@infradead.org, rostedt@goodmis.org, dhowells@redhat.com,
> edumazet@google.com, dvhart@linux.intel.com, fweisbec@gmail.com, oleg@redhat.com, sbw@mit.edu
> Sent: Monday, June 2, 2014 3:27:29 PM
> Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/2] MAINTAINERS: Add "R:" designated-reviewers tag
> 
> On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 12:11:55PM -0700, josh@joshtriplett.org wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 12:08:21PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 11:56:35AM -0700, josh@joshtriplett.org wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 11:16:58AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > > On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 10:59:28AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > > > > On Mon, 2014-06-02 at 10:48 -0700, josh@joshtriplett.org wrote:
> > > > > > > On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 10:22:58AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Mon, 2014-06-02 at 10:00 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > A ksummit-discuss email thread looked at the difficulty
> > > > > > > > > recruiting
> > > > > > > > > and retaining reviewers.
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > []
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > Paul Walmsley also noted the need for patch
> > > > > > > > > submitters to know who the key reviewers are and suggested
> > > > > > > > > adding an
> > > > > > > > > "R:" tag to the MAINTAINERS file to record this information
> > > > > > > > > on a
> > > > > > > > > per-subsystem basis.
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > I'm not sure of the value of this.
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Why not just mark the actual reviewers as maintainers?
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > As discussed in the kernel summit discussion, being a regular
> > > > > > > patch
> > > > > > > reviewer isn't the same thing as being *the* maintainer.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I think it's not particularly important or valuable
> > > > > > here to make that distinction.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > What real difference does it make?
> > > > > 
> > > > > In the particular case of Josh, none, at least from my viewpoint.  He
> > > > > of
> > > > > course might or might not want to take on additional maintainership
> > > > > responsibility at this particular point in time, in which case, I
> > > > > would
> > > > > be more than happy to have him as a designated maintainer.
> > > > 
> > > > For the record, I'd be happy to be listed as a co-maintainer for RCU.
> > > > :)
> > > 
> > > I would be happy to put you down as maintainer and Steven down as
> > > official reviewer.  ;-)
> > 
> > I'd suggest adding Mathieu Desnoyers, Oleg Nesterov, and Lai Jiangshan
> > as reviewers as well, with their consent.
> 
> Mathieu, Oleg, Lai, any objections?

No objection from me. I'm always glad to help out
reviewing RCU patches whenever I have some cycles
available.

Thanks,

Mathieu

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com