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 49BABF7F for ; Tue, 18 Sep 2018 17:18:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-io1-f67.google.com (mail-io1-f67.google.com [209.85.166.67]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8393A798 for ; Tue, 18 Sep 2018 17:18:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-io1-f67.google.com with SMTP id 75-v6so2194627iou.11 for ; Tue, 18 Sep 2018 10:18:37 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20180917115916.37fd5388@coco.lan> <2174637.IVJC5EhCEq@avalon> <20180918160236.GK2471@sirena.org.uk> <20180918163231.GB10134@agluck-desk> In-Reply-To: From: Linus Torvalds Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2018 10:18:25 -0700 Message-ID: To: Dmitry Torokhov Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Cc: mchehab+samsung@kernel.org, tim.bird@sony.com, ksummit Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [MAINTAINER SUMMIT] community management/subsystem governance List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , [ Still very much on break, but reading ksuummit-discuss and answering this one ] On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 9:35 AM Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 9:33 AM Luck, Tony wrote: > > > > Or, shock, horror, tell one-time contributors that it is OK to > > put the patch in an attachment to the e-mail. Outlook doesn't > > (usually) mess with the contents of attachments. > > And then have maintainer having hard time trying to comment on said > patch in the attachment. I'd rather not. I actually think that *this* could be easily handled by trivial tooling that doesn't have to be set up over and over again inside companies or teaching people. In fact, doesn't patchwork already do exactly that? I have to say, there are real technical advantages to using attachments for patches, particularly when you have odd combinations of locales. It's gotten to be less of an issue over time and we're still almost entirely US-ASCII with the occasional UTF-8, but we do still have the occasional problem. Using attachments at least detaches the email charset from the user locale, and from random other MUA issues. But yes, the "comment on individual parts of the patch" part is very important too. The main problem with having something that rewrites things is that it breaks DKIM etc, so you can't just have a pure email gateway. It almost needs to be something at a higher semantic level like patchwork (that could still send out rewritten emails). In many cases, you might want that anyway (ie wouldn't it be lovely when the patch is also checked for "does it build" and looks up the maintainers based on what paths it touches etc etc). So a sane email / web-interface kind of gateway that allows people to work the way they prefer. But I guess "trivial" is completely the wrong word to use. Linus