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 6E53571 for ; Fri, 22 Jul 2016 20:02:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.9]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2103322D for ; Fri, 22 Jul 2016 20:02:06 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2016 13:02:06 -0700 From: Darren Hart To: Daniel Vetter Message-ID: <20160722200206.GA3703@f23x64.localdomain> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Cc: Grant Likely , Dave Airlie , Linus Torvalds , "Nikula, Jani" , "ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org" Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] (group) maintainership models List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 02:11:58PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > In my very first KS I found the maintainership model presentations > (x86-tip & armsoc) rather interesting. And last year we've had an > ad-hoc discussion about group maintainership again. I think drm&i915 > would be an interesting case since over the past year I've done some > changes which are at the edge of what's common in the kernel, and it > seems to work (at least for us) fairly well. I discussed this a bit > with a few folks at ELC San Diego too. > > Short summary: i915 has now a two-level maintenance model with 2 > maintainers (who take the blame) and 15 people who can push patches. > In a way a rather big group, but not so big that people don't all know > each another any more personally. We have some detailed docs about the > patch flow and expectations: > > https://01.org/linuxgraphics/gfx-docs/maintainer-tools/drm-intel.html > > and about the dim tool used to support this all > > https://01.org/linuxgraphics/gfx-docs/maintainer-tools/dim.html > > But I think the more interesting bits are why I decided to try this > out, what I hoped would happen, what I feared might happen. And with 1 > year of experience, what actually happens and what I think is needed > to make this work and an actual benefit over more traditional > maintainer models. And of course I'd like to compare notes with other > group maintainers. I'd be interested in the discussion. I think having it would also serve to minimize the differences between policies across subsystems (which is a common topic people have raised with me). -- Darren Hart Intel Open Source Technology Center