[Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC] MAINTAINERS: clarify some of the tags

[Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC] MAINTAINERS: clarify some of the tags

[Cornelia Huck]

The MAINTAINERS file is a bit sparse on information about what
the different designators are. Let's add some more information
to give contributors a better idea about what the different
roles are.

Signed-off-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
---

This came out of a discussion about what being a 'reviewer' listed in
this file actually means. A reviewer probably should already have a
track record of doing helpful reviews before being listed in here.

While at it, I also tried to add some more hints for the other entries.
This patch is supposed to be a starting point for further discussion.

---
 MAINTAINERS | 5 +++++
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)

diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
index 40672c4eba..7d9dbc6724 100644
--- a/MAINTAINERS
+++ 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.
 	R: Designated reviewer: FullName <address@domain>
 	   These reviewers should be CCed on patches.
+	   Reviewers are familiar with the subject matter and provide feedback
+	   even though they are not maintainers.
 	L: Mailing list that is relevant to this area
+	   These lists should be CCed on patches.
 	W: Web-page with status/info
 	Q: Patchwork web based patch tracking system site
 	T: SCM tree type and location.  Type is one of: git, hg, quilt, stgit.
-- 
2.14.4

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC] MAINTAINERS: clarify some of the tags

[Cornelia Huck]

On Fri, 26 Oct 2018 12:57:11 +0200
Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> wrote:

> The MAINTAINERS file is a bit sparse on information about what
> the different designators are. Let's add some more information
> to give contributors a better idea about what the different
> roles are.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
> ---
> 
> This came out of a discussion about what being a 'reviewer' listed in
> this file actually means. A reviewer probably should already have a
> track record of doing helpful reviews before being listed in here.
> 
> While at it, I also tried to add some more hints for the other entries.
> This patch is supposed to be a starting point for further discussion.

Ping. Further discussion would be good :)

> 
> ---
>  MAINTAINERS | 5 +++++
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
> index 40672c4eba..7d9dbc6724 100644
> --- a/MAINTAINERS
> +++ 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.
>  	R: Designated reviewer: FullName <address@domain>
>  	   These reviewers should be CCed on patches.
> +	   Reviewers are familiar with the subject matter and provide feedback
> +	   even though they are not maintainers.
>  	L: Mailing list that is relevant to this area
> +	   These lists should be CCed on patches.
>  	W: Web-page with status/info
>  	Q: Patchwork web based patch tracking system site
>  	T: SCM tree type and location.  Type is one of: git, hg, quilt, stgit.

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC] MAINTAINERS: clarify some of the tags

[Eric Blake]

On 11/15/18 10:20 AM, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Oct 2018 12:57:11 +0200
> Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> wrote:
> 
>> The MAINTAINERS file is a bit sparse on information about what
>> the different designators are. Let's add some more information
>> to give contributors a better idea about what the different
>> roles are.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
>> ---
>>
>> This came out of a discussion about what being a 'reviewer' listed in
>> this file actually means. A reviewer probably should already have a
>> track record of doing helpful reviews before being listed in here.
>>
>> While at it, I also tried to add some more hints for the other entries.
>> This patch is supposed to be a starting point for further discussion.
> 
> Ping. Further discussion would be good :)

Recent threads have mentioned the possibility of potentially adding a 
new category P: for the person that submits pull requests, although I'm 
not quite sure how that is different from M: as a maintainer

>> +++ 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"?

>>   	R: Designated reviewer: FullName <address@domain>
>>   	   These reviewers should be CCed on patches.
>> +	   Reviewers are familiar with the subject matter and provide feedback
>> +	   even though they are not maintainers.
>>   	L: Mailing list that is relevant to this area
>> +	   These lists should be CCed on patches.
>>   	W: Web-page with status/info
>>   	Q: Patchwork web based patch tracking system site
>>   	T: SCM tree type and location.  Type is one of: git, hg, quilt, stgit.
> 

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.

-- 
Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc.           +1-919-301-3266
Virtualization:  qemu.org | libvirt.org

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC] MAINTAINERS: clarify some of the tags

[Cornelia Huck]

On Thu, 15 Nov 2018 10:46:21 -0600
Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com> wrote:

> On 11/15/18 10:20 AM, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> > On Fri, 26 Oct 2018 12:57:11 +0200
> > Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> wrote:
> >   
> >> The MAINTAINERS file is a bit sparse on information about what
> >> the different designators are. Let's add some more information
> >> to give contributors a better idea about what the different
> >> roles are.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
> >> ---
> >>
> >> This came out of a discussion about what being a 'reviewer' listed in
> >> this file actually means. A reviewer probably should already have a
> >> track record of doing helpful reviews before being listed in here.
> >>
> >> While at it, I also tried to add some more hints for the other entries.
> >> This patch is supposed to be a starting point for further discussion.  
> > 
> > Ping. Further discussion would be good :)  
> 
> Recent threads have mentioned the possibility of potentially adding a 
> new category P: for the person that submits pull requests, although I'm 
> not quite sure how that is different from M: as a maintainer

Let's wait how that discussion turns out (I'm not quite sure about the
semantics, either.) We can document it then.

> 
> >> +++ 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.)

> 
> >>   	R: Designated reviewer: FullName <address@domain>
> >>   	   These reviewers should be CCed on patches.
> >> +	   Reviewers are familiar with the subject matter and provide feedback
> >> +	   even though they are not maintainers.
> >>   	L: Mailing list that is relevant to this area
> >> +	   These lists should be CCed on patches.
> >>   	W: Web-page with status/info
> >>   	Q: Patchwork web based patch tracking system site
> >>   	T: SCM tree type and location.  Type is one of: git, hg, quilt, stgit.  
> >   
> 
> 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?

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC] MAINTAINERS: clarify some of the tags

[Eric Blake]

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

>> Recent threads have mentioned the possibility of potentially adding a
>> new category P: for the person that submits pull requests, although I'm
>> not quite sure how that is different from M: as a maintainer
> 
> Let's wait how that discussion turns out (I'm not quite sure about the
> semantics, either.) We can document it then.

Indeed, incremental patches are better than doing nothing while waiting 
for perfection.

> 
>>
>>>> +++ 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.

>> 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.

-- 
Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc.           +1-919-301-3266
Virtualization:  qemu.org | libvirt.org

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC] MAINTAINERS: clarify some of the tags

[Cornelia Huck]

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 :)

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC] MAINTAINERS: clarify some of the tags

[Peter Maydell]

On 16 November 2018 at 15:33, Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> wrote:
> 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.

>> >> 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 :)

Applied to master, thanks
-- PMM

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC] MAINTAINERS: clarify some of the tags

[Markus Armbruster]

Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> writes:

> The MAINTAINERS file is a bit sparse on information about what
> the different designators are. Let's add some more information
> to give contributors a better idea about what the different
> roles are.
>
> Signed-off-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
> ---
>
> This came out of a discussion about what being a 'reviewer' listed in
> this file actually means. A reviewer probably should already have a
> track record of doing helpful reviews before being listed in here.
>
> While at it, I also tried to add some more hints for the other entries.
> This patch is supposed to be a starting point for further discussion.
>
> ---
>  MAINTAINERS | 5 +++++
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
> index 40672c4eba..7d9dbc6724 100644
> --- a/MAINTAINERS
> +++ 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.
>  	R: Designated reviewer: FullName <address@domain>
>  	   These reviewers should be CCed on patches.
> +	   Reviewers are familiar with the subject matter and provide feedback
> +	   even though they are not maintainers.
>  	L: Mailing list that is relevant to this area
> +	   These lists should be CCed on patches.
>  	W: Web-page with status/info
>  	Q: Patchwork web based patch tracking system site
>  	T: SCM tree type and location.  Type is one of: git, hg, quilt, stgit.

Perfect is the enemy of good.  This is good.

Reviewed-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>