Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] [RESEND2] Qemu unmaintained?

[Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>]

On 09/10/2009 07:38 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> Avi Kivity wrote:
>> On 09/10/2009 07:22 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>>>> You certainly shouldn't ack patches you don't commit!
>>>
>>>
>>> But most spend time in staging.
>>
>> What's the percentage of patches that make it to master?  For me it's 
>> >90%.  If it's too low we nned to fix that.
>
> Closer to 20% I'd say.  This is largely due to multiple versions of 
> the same series.  If there's a way to improve this, that would make my 
> life a lot easier.

Well, I'd say this is much more important than acking patches (though if 
you acked and unacked patches, it would be a lot more visible, and might 
shame the submitters into increased care).

Why are there multiple series?  If you have comments, clearly you 
wouldn't stage the patches.  If others have comments, then you can 
simply wait a few days before staging (this is what I do).  If testing 
fails, well, that's what testing is for.  If the submitter puts out a 
new version, well, no good answer to that.  Ask for an incremental?

> Well the question is, should I/you edit this, or reject the patch 
> requesting a better changelog?
>
> Certainly, the later is what akpm often does.

I'm happy to reject patches for whitespace but I will edit changelogs.  
My rationale is that many people don't care about that and I can't make 
them care; further the log is mostly for my own benefit - I spend quite 
a lot of time reading it when hunting regressions or preparing 
patchqueues for upstream.

-- 
I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this
signature is too narrow to contain.