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 AB79F9A3 for ; Fri, 30 May 2014 14:45:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.tuxdriver.com (charlotte.tuxdriver.com [70.61.120.58]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EE79520114 for ; Fri, 30 May 2014 14:45:10 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 30 May 2014 10:34:50 -0400 From: "John W. Linville" To: Greg KH Message-ID: <20140530143449.GC24054@tuxdriver.com> References: <1400925225.6956.25.camel@dabdike.int.hansenpartnership.com> <20140529182753.GJ25041@thunk.org> <700704721.GMn4j9GJx9@vostro.rjw.lan> <20140529233004.GB11741@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140529233004.GB11741@kroah.com> Cc: James Bottomley , "ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org" Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] Reforming Acked-by (was Re: [TOPIC] Encouraging more reviewers) List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 04:30:04PM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 02:03:16PM -0700, Olof Johansson wrote: > > What are we really trying to fix here? Is the current process really > > broken or are we trying to create more process that's not needed for > > some other reason? > > I think the latter. > > Somehow, we seem to be constantly increasing our rate of change, are > people thinking we are having problems here? If so, exactly where? > This thread has taken an odd turn into trying to make some new kind of > process for an unknown issue (i.e. the people on this list are not going > to recognize the reviewers more, it's up to you to educate your managers > / company more.) > > Are maintainers who deal with huge number of patches (i.e. 1000+ a year) > crying out for help that this is somehow going to reduce their burden? > > I don't think so, but hey, what do I know about this development > process... I think I'm in that group. FWIW, all this talk of new and vaguely differentiated "Foo-by" tags gives me heartburn. I try to be dilligent about collecting any such tags that get posted before a patch is merged, but it can be a bit painful. Those tags still come down to trust anyway -- just because someone replies with a Reviewed-by, Tested-by, Built-and-run-with-ten-other-pathes-by or whatnot doesn't provide any guarantee at all unless you know the person and trust what they are saying in the first place. John -- John W. Linville Someday the world will need a hero, and you linville@tuxdriver.com might be all we have. Be ready.