From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 985159C3 for ; Wed, 28 May 2014 17:36:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mezzanine.sirena.org.uk (mezzanine.sirena.org.uk [106.187.55.193]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 03E8C2025A for ; Wed, 28 May 2014 17:36:11 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 18:35:53 +0100 From: Mark Brown To: Mimi Zohar Message-ID: <20140528173553.GE5099@sirena.org.uk> References: <1400925225.6956.25.camel@dabdike.int.hansenpartnership.com> <20140524111927.GA3455@katana> <4700397.FLxRVChBLf@vostro.rjw.lan> <20140528143246.GV15585@mwanda> <20140528163902.GA5099@sirena.org.uk> <1401295862.13546.109.camel@dhcp-9-2-203-236.watson.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="9crTWz/Z+Zyzu20v" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1401295862.13546.109.camel@dhcp-9-2-203-236.watson.ibm.com> Cc: James Bottomley , Dan Carpenter , "ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org" Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [TOPIC] Encouraging more reviewers List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , --9crTWz/Z+Zyzu20v Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 12:51:02PM -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote: > On Wed, 2014-05-28 at 17:39 +0100, Mark Brown wrote:=20 > > On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 04:39:15PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > My approach has been to insist on an in-patch revision log which gets > > > included in the commit. And that for any changes and bugs spotted the > > > reviewer/commenter must be acknowleged. See e.g. > > This does mean that the final changelogs that get included in the kernel > > get very large and noisy and is relying on the submitters doing a good > > job paying attention to review comments in the first place, recording > > exactly what changed and so on. They are sometimes useful but normally > > I'm finding very little value in the changelogs in the first place, > > generally it doesn't really matter what the problems were in any > > previous versions. > True, but when you have to squash patches there needs to be at least > some recognition of who contributed what. There's a world of difference between thanking people for review and a detailed account of all the changes made in every single iteration of the review. --9crTWz/Z+Zyzu20v Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJThh51AAoJELSic+t+oim9L4IP/iZH3kFtGTz035nVS3GfZNes 75FlaUcMUSejTKInc+6JY3iDt6MDRMSieGJCDMYAiOngS3ohXZkjI+sBgw/wQv6f A/Ry90VL9i5NdF7bsRaxCbpTQ8zOnKWuh/wRrT9jjH3Zr4z6ajq1qI6vWWbdSyhz syL74OhauCYcH9dUEVzzxvMFAcYaGHxawTN9e2m20AXLNOLdZu3j2iAf/Luw4eeS 4P7FgrXI78uaJLlAwttC91TV/t8PVZ3ljJgMofCca13j8TW1HyyqlNPo0vUxQ9dN iFHYxrgNbV8tEUfyLVfX2M9I0wyXAbfsjTyT777AX9j+HqkNbhVz8YeDVRdtKioi GrzCh08OyEbgfExW/0Hb9a6R6CT0o9S7xJ0BrHt1W9v7WUwggEtarweLnVoo+HfT P222tidtlljtR6VkBD5GFwhckZdHKZ+TbgDBjys1p7zdjPNSPiRbmTA436YylPfq KG1BSdfXcgSZtvjbnGafyHWIGw4CkLgmOUrXM1gM22CU13pcf4iZCvw2rDLEQZJO 3QIq8dxn1rS0d+hOiGnESVgZoPr6YCWKjZQXq9+gjl32IgpikcISlGCByJHzeU2T jZ+/SshU8Lq5j91fH1FRA4wMmXqQIOY1k7omyX6A6xpLwTtJ6G32By+a4KMal/cx 58Ce4uGxGM5/jeRA1ogM =0dyh -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --9crTWz/Z+Zyzu20v--