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 D5EB524CF for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2019 11:59:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pokefinder.org (sauhun.de [88.99.104.3]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B4CB884 for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2019 11:59:51 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2019 13:59:50 +0200 From: Wolfram Sang To: Geert Uytterhoeven Message-ID: <20190708115949.GC1050@kunai> References: <20190706142738.GA6893@kunai> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="aT9PWwzfKXlsBJM1" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Cc: ksummit Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] Keeping reviews meaningful List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , --aT9PWwzfKXlsBJM1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Geert, > > 1) we need a better distinction between Acked-by: and Reviewed-by: and = encourage > > stricter use of that >=20 > Before we had "Reviewed-by", "Acked-by" meant "looks OK to me". > Then we got "Reviewed-by" for more thorough reviews. This is what still makes most sense to me. You can express e.g. that you like a patch series and approve the general approach taken but haven't gone for the gory details -> Acked-by (a short explaining paragraph would make sense, then, too) Is that old fashioned? Acked-by only for maintainers doesn't make sense to me. Neiher does when Acked-by has a different meaning for maintainers and non-maintainers. > > 3) trivial patches should rather get Acked-by >=20 > These days when given by a maintainer, "Acked-by" means that the > maintainer is happy for the patch going in through another subsystem. I still see this as a "looks OK to me" variant. A patch is good enough to enter my subsystem. Sometimes, I also use "Reviewed-by" for this, namely when I thoroughly looked at (=3Dreviewed) a patch. > > 2) A short paragraph will usually do. Of course, trust helps a lot, but= it > > doesn't solve everything. Trusted people can be in a hurry, too, etc. A= nd for > > people I don't know, the plain tag doesn't tell me much. Examples for s= hort > > descriptions: "I can't say much about the media part, but the I2C part = is > > proper" or "I also checked the documentation and I think this is a good > > approach to overcome the issue" or "All my concerns in the preceding > > discussions have been addressed" >=20 > Definitely good to have, but hard to enforce, without making the process > heavier. As I wrote before, I don't want to enforce that. But spread the word that it is good to have and should be done and common sense should apply. > I have a fifth thesis: many people (incl. guilty me) browse quickly > through many patches flying by on mailing lists, but don't always go to > the effort of replying if they don't see something wrong immediately. > This means we don't catch a share of the reviews happening. For me, Acked-by would do here. Thanks, Wolfram --aT9PWwzfKXlsBJM1 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEOZGx6rniZ1Gk92RdFA3kzBSgKbYFAl0jMDUACgkQFA3kzBSg KbYKLg/+I7GGmryC7CozEep9ep/YaPc5FcWY2HNsbYN2TrMnUboaXQEJ0UrK5CAi oqEjbmZVzd99Q2EmuORDDUs9SMf35RcrnOqrobg/2q3O0Yd8y9yXl8YMeiaodllv QHWSuvVgG9GPwZvT92sS0SfEpgcBgpC0/uSrpygc4dEvfHBYU+UJOMXB3HnPQ3d9 EO4w/M7B4mSynr+LjcZm5/KMt4YrKKK/ZlaxOJKVNmDzpDAuuJxgrs3Gm3XZWDDd NlGiHbYcQA4uk0+LC25eEFIPyNjWXP1NJ2H10KtL+6tIEARD3RYdA7X9cvH1rXFH a+DasSAAHzvTZ5xn2YP3zA19bubGpbHQf/s3ZiVpYBCOQMwpjdcoaHCNgo5Jp5lf h564oaDAnMaXigwhTrik8FTqFkhqxD9uLJWt25O/D6T7i1IYSKzjg0erzUV64m1b e0atlOGPKjPIvBkk+Yp8Sq/FriqYljNODExpCvBBbtd5Dqz0WK8l6UCsvbLhjmRs byxJisbEbRt4zX1bh42Kb9q3wtRNILTUinlMzEPAyjEPQrHeN10If/up8BqHJELF gl60Bmcb8ZzGe5cxbQg76QCRGPQHq+hbCo+y+Ia+BhVWyRJocCKZOIgVh4CzcxvV szyQoFGa+px4kN8jtJ91PB4EmgITurQmmFLgzRI3XrYfUXgo7Xo= =cAD1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --aT9PWwzfKXlsBJM1--