From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MlmQD-00082C-VG for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 10 Sep 2009 12:22:58 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MlmQ9-0007yt-A5 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 10 Sep 2009 12:22:57 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=39839 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MlmQ9-0007yi-6H for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 10 Sep 2009 12:22:53 -0400 Received: from qw-out-1920.google.com ([74.125.92.147]:32465) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MlmQ7-0002Dh-Rl for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 10 Sep 2009 12:22:52 -0400 Received: by qw-out-1920.google.com with SMTP id 5so82682qwc.4 for ; Thu, 10 Sep 2009 09:22:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4AA927D8.7000900@codemonkey.ws> Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 11:22:48 -0500 From: Anthony Liguori MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] [RESEND2] Qemu unmaintained? References: <20090902074905.GB25711@chrom.inf.tu-dresden.de> <20090909121817.GA21997@chrom.inf.tu-dresden.de> <4AA7A6EC.10907@codemonkey.ws> <20090910070336.GD3351@amit-x200.redhat.com> <4AA90592.7080100@codemonkey.ws> <4AA90F7F.2030709@redhat.com> <4AA92122.3050103@codemonkey.ws> <4AA924AE.8060807@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <4AA924AE.8060807@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Avi Kivity Cc: Amit Shah , Bernhard Kauer , qemu-devel@nongnu.org Avi Kivity wrote: > On 09/10/2009 06:54 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote: >> Avi Kivity wrote: >>> On 09/10/2009 04:56 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote: >>>> >>>> The problem is patch volume. We often see hundreds of patches a >>>> day. If typing a mail for each patch takes 2 minutes, that's >>>> potentially hours spent just on sending these mails. >>>> >>> >>> You exaggerate. The average rate is 13 patches per calendar day. >> >> On list or committed? There are a lot more on list than 13.. > > You certainly shouldn't ack patches you don't commit! But most spend time in staging. Acking patches that go to master, that's perfectly fine to do. The qemu-commits list does that and should CC the author directly so this should be happening. It's acking things that go into staging that I think would be difficult and not necessarily productive. >> This is goofy and is caused by improper patch submission. But when >> people quote email threads in a commit message, I don't remove them. >> It don't see it as a problem. > > From long experience, most commit messages need to be edited. People > rarely write commit messages that can be understood a year later, and > they don't know how 'git am' works. I don't like editing patches. I think it's unfair to the submitter to change their patch underneath of them. I'd suggest providing feedback on the list to people who write bad commit messages and ask them to write better ones. I try to limit the changes I make to resolving merge conflicts. Regards, Anthony Liguori