From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:41702) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S7Bs3-000739-SB for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 16:29:33 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S7Bs1-00073z-Sc for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 16:29:31 -0400 Received: from mail-yx0-f173.google.com ([209.85.213.173]:64843) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S7Bs1-00073q-OM for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 16:29:29 -0400 Received: by yenr5 with SMTP id r5so3526963yen.4 for ; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 13:29:28 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4F5E5CA4.3040407@codemonkey.ws> Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2012 15:29:24 -0500 From: Anthony Liguori MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <4F5E58BE.6040808@weilnetz.de> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] We need more reviewers/maintainers!! List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Maydell Cc: Stefan Weil , "Michael S. Tsirkin" , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Stefano Stabellini On 03/12/2012 03:24 PM, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 12 March 2012 20:12, Stefan Weil wrote: >> I agree that more maintainers would be good, but we also need >> more people with commit rights. Why? There a many examples of >> urgent patches (= patches which fix broken builds) which take >> several days even when they were reviewed before they finally >> are committed. > > I agree that that's a specific area it would be nice to do > better in. It seems to me that the qemu-trivial process for > sweeping up trivial patches has been working well; maybe we > could use a slightly more formal qemu-urgent process for > flagging up build breakage etc? > > (Personally I'd support a rule that any outstanding > build-breakage fixes must always go in before anything else.) When are build-breakage fixes not trivial? >> Only two maintainers are allowed to make full use of the patchwork >> (http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/qemu-devel/) infrastructure. >> Why not all maintainers? > > I tried to get myself added to the maintainers list (with > agreement from Anthony) for that a long time ago and got zero > response from the people running that patchwork instance. I don't have any control over patchwork. I believe Michael Tsirkin is the one that initially set it up. Regards, Anthony Liguori > > A good patchwork instance is really useful -- the Linaro one > is set up with hooks into monitoring git, so patches that are > committed move automatically to 'accepted', for instance. > [It's only semi-automatic, though, and I don't know if it > would still be as useful with the much higher volume qemu gets.] > > -- PMM