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 8DD8941C for ; Fri, 17 Jul 2015 16:10:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bh-25.webhostbox.net (bh-25.webhostbox.net [208.91.199.152]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 00AC4150 for ; Fri, 17 Jul 2015 16:10:36 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <55A928F1.8080704@roeck-us.net> Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2015 09:10:25 -0700 From: Guenter Roeck MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Brown , Steven Rostedt References: <20150708114011.3a1f1861@noble> <2879113.fraeuJIr2M@avalon> <20150709193718.GD9169@vmdeb7> <20150710143641.GW4341@mwanda> <20150710160714.GL111846@vmdeb7> <20150710222351.GA28632@kroah.com> <20150711000034.GU111846@vmdeb7> <20150711001348.GA30675@kroah.com> <20150711055441.GA6316@sudip-PC> <20150715212043.775be5d2@gandalf.local.home> <20150716132551.GH4039@sirena.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <20150716132551.GH4039@sirena.org.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org, Dan Carpenter , 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 07/16/2015 06:25 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 09:20:43PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: >> Sudip Mukherjee wrote: > >>> Another problem, when a newbie tries to move out of staging to some other >>> subsystem he likes, the maintainer may not be that much responsive. Just >>> for example, i submitted a patch on November, 2014 and I am yet to receive >>> a reply or review to that and the patch was not a style correction patch. > >> BTW, it should always be OK to ping the maintainer if they ignore a >> patch. I believe one week is a good time to wait. And again in another >> week if they still do not reply. I know a few maintainers that think if >> they get to a patch that is old and the author never pinged them, they >> think the author doesn't think that patch is too important and they >> just delete it. > > Please don't encourage people to send content free pings bit instead > resend it - a content free ping mostly just adds to mail volume which is > pretty much the original problem. If the patch has actually been lost > then a resend is going to be needed anyway and if not then it's mostly > just adding to mail volume. With a lot of mail clients (including mutt > which I use) the nag will get threaded in with the original patch buried > back in the mailbox and not even be seen if that's still sitting waiting > for handling. > I tried both (ping and resend). In either case the response depends on the maintainer. Some will accept either, some will say you should have res-sent the patch if you sent a ping, some will tell you that you should have pinged if you re-sent it. Depending on the maintainer the response can be pretty strong. It would be great to have a single well defined and documented mechanism to avoid the "whatever you do is wrong" response. Guenter