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 ESMTPS id 4A011B1D for ; Fri, 10 Jul 2015 15:44:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtprelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0029.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.29]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B749F108 for ; Fri, 10 Jul 2015 15:44:11 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2015 11:44:09 -0400 From: Steven Rostedt To: Darren Hart Message-ID: <20150710114409.638582c0@gandalf.local.home> In-Reply-To: <20150709193718.GD9169@vmdeb7> References: <201507080121.41463.PeterHuewe@gmx.de> <559C73DF.2030008@roeck-us.net> <20150708114011.3a1f1861@noble> <2879113.fraeuJIr2M@avalon> <20150709193718.GD9169@vmdeb7> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org, Jason Cooper Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] Recruitment (Reviewers, Testers, Maintainers, Hobbyists) List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Thu, 9 Jul 2015 12:37:18 -0700 Darren Hart wrote: > I've come to believe that this is one of many side effects of our dependency on > a completely free form mechanism for the management of our patches, a mechanism > which is becoming harder and harder to setup "correctly" with modern tooling > (since the industry is killing "real email"). > > I spend a highly disproportionate amount of my time, relative to measurable > quality impact to the kernel, going over the nuances of submitting patches. > > 1) Must have a complete commit message > 2) DCO goes above the --- > 3) Include a patch changelog, do so below --- > 4) Cc maintainers :-) > 5) Checkpatch... checkpatch... checkpatch... Ug, don't emphasize checkpatch. I see people making patches uglier due to it. I have an old version of checkpatch that I sometimes run, but the new version, IMHO, has more noise than signal. > 6) Compiler warnings > 7) CodingStyle :-) > 8) Use ascii or utf8 character encodings > > Looking forward a bit, I would love to see some tooling in place for people to > submit patches either via a web form (which eliminates all the email tooling for > submitting patches - which is where the formatting is especially critical) or > through one of the more managed git systems, like gerrit, etc. You mean like a web page that has a bunch of entries (like submitting a paper to a LF conference), and you need to fill out. Subject: Fill out a one line top of this patch Problem or enhancement : Why did you write this patch? Was there a problem you discovered, or is this a new feature you want to add. Why this patch is needed: Why is this patch needed. If you fixed the problem, describe what you did and why you did it this way. If it is a feature, explain why this feature is needed, use cases for this feature, and how to use this new feature. If this adds a new user space interface, make sure you provide a man page (separate) Patch file to upload: Captcha: We don't want bots doing this Then this web server could run get_maintainers.pl and email the appropriate people with a generated formatted patch. It could also allow versioning. Today, people seem to be use to filling out web forms. Obviously, this isn't a requirement to use, but could be used by people that don't already know the Linux process. It could be a bit smarter than get maintainers, as it could possibly detect typo and whitespace patches and then send it off to the trivial maintainer only. -- Steve