From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
	[172.17.192.35])
	by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 57F17323
	for <ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Sat, 18 Jul 2015 12:27:14 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from galahad.ideasonboard.com (galahad.ideasonboard.com
	[185.26.127.97])
	by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DB104129
	for <ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Sat, 18 Jul 2015 12:27:13 +0000 (UTC)
From: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>
To: ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 2015 15:27:38 +0300
Message-ID: <1637650.37BjvuIXv1@avalon>
In-Reply-To: <20150717122303.247b5621@gandalf.local.home>
References: <20150708114011.3a1f1861@noble> <55A928F1.8080704@roeck-us.net>
	<20150717122303.247b5621@gandalf.local.home>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Cc: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>,
	Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>
Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] Recruitment (Reviewers, Testers,
	Maintainers, Hobbyists)
List-Id: <ksummit-discuss.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/ksummit-discuss>,
	<mailto:ksummit-discuss-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/ksummit-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ksummit-discuss-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ksummit-discuss>,
	<mailto:ksummit-discuss-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>

On Friday 17 July 2015 12:23:03 Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Jul 2015 09:10:25 -0700 Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > I tried both (ping and resend). In either case the response depends on the
> > maintainer. Some will accept either, some will say you should have
> > res-sent the patch if you sent a ping, some will tell you that you should
> > have pinged if you re-sent it. Depending on the maintainer the response
> > can be pretty strong.
> > 
> > It would be great to have a single well defined and documented mechanism
> > to avoid the "whatever you do is wrong" response.
> 
> Or at least a polite reply to have them do it the other way.
> 
>  "Hi! Sorry, I've been busy and haven't had time to review your patch.
>  Can you please resend the patch to me again, my inbox corrupted your
>  old one"
> 
> Sure the corruption message may be a lie,

"My dog ate your patch" sounds better to me. We could then have a contest to 
see who will come up with the best fake excuse :-)

> but at least it will keep them from saying "why not use what I already sent
> you".

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart