Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] Keeping reviews meaningful

[Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@ubuntu.com>]

On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 10:26:01AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Aug 2019, Jan Kara wrote:
> > On Sat 17-08-19 21:35:29, Paul Walmsley wrote:
> > > On Mon, 15 Jul 2019, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
> > > 
> > > > I'd suggest changing the text to read:
> > > > 
> > > >  	 - Acked-by: indicates an agreement by the maintainer or
> > > > 	   reviewer of the the relevant code that the patch is
> > > > 	   appropriate for inclusion into the kernel.
> > > 
> > > This would be a positive step forward.  I would be in favor of this. 
> > > 
> > > It would also be good to state here, if it isn't stated already, that 
> > > "reviewer" means "someone who is listed in an R: line in MAINTAINERS".
> > 
> > I don't think that 'R:' entry in MAINTAINERS should be really asked for.
> > IMO that is unnecessary bureaucracy and discourages review from people
> > that are not core developers. Sure the quality of the review may be lower
> > than from core developer but still there's some value in it. So I'd really
> > leave it at the discretion of the maintainer whether he accepts or just
> > ignores Reviewed-by tag.
> 
> The R: in MAINTAINERS is there to make sure these people get actually CC'ed
> on patches against that particular subsystem. It does not mean that others
> are not allowed or encouraged to review patches in that area.

If I may, I agree that only accepting acks/reviews by people in R: is
too strict. Imho, it sends the wrong message and probably discourages
participation in kernel development. It's also a high bar currently to
get people even listed as R: In my experience people are reluctant to
suggest they be added as R: in that file because it might be conceived
as being overly assertive of ones abilities. One easy fix could be to
encourage maintainers of a given subsystem to be more open to add people
they trust as R:

Christian