qemu-devel.nongnu.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
To: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>, Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC] MAINTAINERS: clarify some of the tags
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2018 16:33:50 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181116163350.40fcd163.cohuck@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20654e1b-38a0-7f70-df97-7ccd5bf17197@redhat.com>

On Fri, 16 Nov 2018 09:23:27 -0600
Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com> wrote:

> On 11/16/18 9:14 AM, Cornelia Huck wrote:

> >>>> +++ b/MAINTAINERS
> >>>> @@ -12,9 +12,14 @@ consult qemu-devel and not any specific individual privately.
> >>>>    Descriptions of section entries:
> >>>>    
> >>>>    	M: Mail patches to: FullName <address@domain>
> >>>> +	   Maintainers are looking after a certain area and must be CCed on
> >>>> +	   patches. They are considered the main contact point.  
> >>
> >> Maybe add something along the lines of "However, a maintainer may accept
> >> code that has been reviewed by others without explicitly reviewing it
> >> themselves"?  
> > 
> > I'm not sure whether that adds vital information. If a maintainer picks
> > a patch that has been reviewed by others, they may or may not do a
> > proper review themselves; but the end result is basically the same
> > (patch makes its way into the tree.)  
> 
> Okay. There's also the counter argument that too much text makes it 
> something that no one will want to spend time reading, so leaving things 
> concise is desirable.

We could also write up a more verbose "patch handling and
maintainership guide" or so; but I'd prefer short comments in
MAINTAINERS covering the basics only.

> 
> >> At any rate, I like the idea of adding the additional descriptions for
> >> the categories, even if we still bike-shed on the wording or even the
> >> set of categories to use.  
> > 
> > What about going with this as a starting point?  
> 
> Yes, works for me. We can always add more patches later if desired.

OK, great!

Peter, would you consider picking up this one for 3.1? At the very
least, it has a R-b from Markus already :)

  reply	other threads:[~2018-11-16 15:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-10-26 10:57 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC] MAINTAINERS: clarify some of the tags Cornelia Huck
2018-11-15 16:20 ` Cornelia Huck
2018-11-15 16:46   ` Eric Blake
2018-11-16 15:14     ` Cornelia Huck
2018-11-16 15:23       ` Eric Blake
2018-11-16 15:33         ` Cornelia Huck [this message]
2018-11-19 11:20           ` Peter Maydell
2018-11-15 18:32 ` Markus Armbruster

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=20181116163350.40fcd163.cohuck@redhat.com \
    --to=cohuck@redhat.com \
    --cc=eblake@redhat.com \
    --cc=peter.maydell@linaro.org \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    /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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).