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 CBDD1B13 for ; Fri, 10 Jul 2015 20:03:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from seldrel01.sonyericsson.com (seldrel01.sonyericsson.com [37.139.156.2]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 70E45F2 for ; Fri, 10 Jul 2015 20:03:20 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <55A02504.6040003@sonymobile.com> Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2015 13:03:16 -0700 From: Tim Bird MIME-Version: 1.0 To: References: <201507080121.41463.PeterHuewe@gmx.de> <559C73DF.2030008@roeck-us.net> <20150708114011.3a1f1861@noble> <2879113.fraeuJIr2M@avalon> <20150709193718.GD9169@vmdeb7> <1436481109.3324.219.camel@infradead.org> <20150710003559.GT11162@sirena.org.uk> <20150710020706.GH111846@vmdeb7> <20150710155144.34dde697@gandalf.local.home> In-Reply-To: <20150710155144.34dde697@gandalf.local.home> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] Recruitment (Reviewers, Testers, Maintainers, Hobbyists) List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On 07/10/2015 12:51 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Thu, 9 Jul 2015 19:07:06 -0700 > Darren Hart wrote: > > >> As far as recruitment goes, I think we're talking about barriers to first-timers >> and such - and git-send-email is one of those things. Eventually, a developer > > +1000 > > I still don't use git-send-email, as I afraid that I'll blow it and end > up sending a thousand patches to every developer that ever touched the > kernel ;-) I'm in exactly the same boat. I don't submit patches frequently enough that I trust a git-send-email workflow. It's too automated for me. I'd rather take the extra time to manually format my patch e-mails and my CC: lists, than be embarrassed. Of course then I make manual mistakes and end up getting embarrassed sometimes anyway, but I can usually avoid a patch embarrassment armageddon. But my manual steps and self-verification are a lot of work each time, so some automation would be very much appreciated. > I still use quilt to send my patch series. Just because I know how it > works and I trust it. And I get to see exactly what it is about to send > (the only thing it can send is what's in the patches/ directory, > nothing else). > > I have a script that takes my git tree and creates the patches in a > format that quilt will send them nicely. Maybe it would be good for a patch submission tool be able to single-step through the submission preparation, both so that developers can learn from it and not just use it as a crutch, and also to allow developers to intervene if it's about to do something stupid. -- Tim