> > The thing I'd like to see way more in the Linux ecosystem:
> > 
> > Paid reviewers/maintainers (selected people, no hiring offers). The
> > number of developers increases faster than the number of quality
> > keepers. So, the latter should be given the chance to focus on it, if
> > they want to.
> 
> That does not make much sense to me. In order to review the code you
> need to understand it and if you already understand the code, you
> can write it as well.

Huh, have you ever maintained something? I couldn't write most of the
drivers I get for I2C, because I simply don't have access to the
hardware. Also, I it is one thing to get the driver working (dealing
with HW bugs and documentation flaws) and another to get the driver
proper (use proper kernal interfaces, coding style...).

> I do not think that having dedicated reviewers is realistic in the
> long run.

Then, think more of dedicated maintainers: I don't know one maintainer
who is not interested in hacking as well. Which is needed, of course.
There are reviews which make flaws in the subsystem core obvious.
Usually, the original patch comitter is only interested in this reviewed
patch and does not want to deal with the core. So, this kind of work is
up to the maintainer. If maintainers are backed off, more of this work
could be done IMO.

> However encouraging reviewers by treating reviewed-by tag with equal
> "respect" as signed-off-by seems like the better way.

In general, yes. As I said before, "Reviewed-by" tags need to be trusted
what also takes some time and effort in the beginning.