From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from list by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.71) id 1dg9Il-0008MC-JW for mharc-qemu-trivial@gnu.org; Fri, 11 Aug 2017 08:44:31 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35344) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dg9Ij-0008Jr-I7 for qemu-trivial@nongnu.org; Fri, 11 Aug 2017 08:44:30 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dg9Ii-0002Db-Hh for qemu-trivial@nongnu.org; Fri, 11 Aug 2017 08:44:29 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:39342) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dg9Ic-0002Am-5O; Fri, 11 Aug 2017 08:44:22 -0400 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A7DB22D0FB3; Fri, 11 Aug 2017 12:44:20 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com A7DB22D0FB3 Authentication-Results: ext-mx05.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: ext-mx05.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=famz@redhat.com Received: from localhost (ovpn-12-60.pek2.redhat.com [10.72.12.60]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C0CAB32AB; Fri, 11 Aug 2017 12:44:19 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2017 20:44:18 +0800 From: Fam Zheng To: Paolo Bonzini Cc: Cornelia Huck , Peter Maydell , QEMU Trivial , Philippe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Mathieu-Daud=E9?= , QEMU Developers , "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" , Alex =?iso-8859-1?Q?Benn=E9e?= , Markus Armbruster , Richard Henderson Message-ID: <20170811124418.GC23309@lemon.lan> References: <20170728053610.15770-19-f4bug@amsat.org> <87mv7aumav.fsf@linaro.org> <8e2e3aa5-4459-76ba-3309-af6b30220346@amsat.org> <87fud0vmak.fsf@linaro.org> <3e66742f-04c5-51b7-de3a-f692c0637bc5@amsat.org> <20170810104604.342af354.cohuck@redhat.com> <20170810122520.48403984.cohuck@redhat.com> <20170811075455.GC27391@lemon.lan> <1ac44263-dc9a-b16e-df10-09253b566b1b@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1ac44263-dc9a-b16e-df10-09253b566b1b@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.8.3 (2017-05-23) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.14 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.29]); Fri, 11 Aug 2017 12:44:20 +0000 (UTC) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 209.132.183.28 Subject: Re: [Qemu-trivial] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 18/47] MAINTAINERS: add missing TCG entry X-BeenThere: qemu-trivial@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2017 12:44:30 -0000 On Fri, 08/11 14:06, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 11/08/2017 09:54, Fam Zheng wrote: > > On Thu, 08/10 12:25, Cornelia Huck wrote: > >>> I think the UI (giving no consideration to how we might implement > >>> this!) would ideally be something like: > >>> * if anybody mails a patch which touches an "unmaintained" file, > >>> a robot should send a reply along the lines of "thanks for the > >>> patch; unfortunately file X is not maintained so it may be > >>> tricky to get patch review for this. You'll need to be > >>> persistent and do more of the legwork than if you were patching > >>> a file that did have an active maintainer" so contributors > >>> know when they've wandered into the swamp > >> > >> That's a good idea. > >> > >>> * some mechanism for easily finding patches to unmaintained > >>> files which haven't got review yet, so that anybody with some > >>> spare time and interest can move some of them along (the idea > >>> being to spread the load rather than trying to designate a > >>> particular "owner" for this headache) > >> > >> Can maybe patchew set a special flag for patches that only touch > >> unmaintained files? > > > > Interesting idea. We have a number of patch status tracking feature requests for > > patchew already. We can tackle them one by one. (The next priority is implement > > "merged".) > > Do you use github issues? I have a private trello board that is slightly more up to date, but github issues does have a few entries too. We can certainly discuss things there. Fam