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 82D5941C for ; Mon, 20 Jul 2015 23:49:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wi0-f169.google.com (mail-wi0-f169.google.com [209.85.212.169]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0097CE3 for ; Mon, 20 Jul 2015 23:49:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wicgb10 with SMTP id gb10so39955082wic.1 for ; Mon, 20 Jul 2015 16:49:27 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <55AD7E2C.9090804@roeck-us.net> References: <20150717154326.6f129bc4@gandalf.local.home> <20150717202412.GA1856@cloud> <20150717163903.67747d86@gandalf.local.home> <20150717204856.GA2048@cloud> <20150717165501.62ed4e04@gandalf.local.home> <1437376105.8968.14.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <20150720203007.GA7797@kroah.com> <55AD7263.8050605@roeck-us.net> <20150720223242.GB23638@kroah.com> <55AD7E2C.9090804@roeck-us.net> From: Bjorn Helgaas Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2015 18:49:07 -0500 Message-ID: To: Steven Rostedt Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: Dan Carpenter , "ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org" , 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 Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 10:48 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Sat, 18 Jul 2015 11:42:28 +1000 > NeilBrown wrote: > >> We talk a lot about creating tooling to help newbies submit perfect >> patches. Maybe we need to spend more time creating tooling to help old >> timers accept imperfect patches. > > +1 +10 I do some work in gerrit, where patches are "automatically" merged by the submitter after being approved by reviewers. It is a real hassle because every last nit has to be removed for the automatic merge to work, and the nits are hard for non-experts to discover. The environment would feel much friendlier if there were a human maintainer involved who could say "this patch belongs on branch X instead," or "this patch needs to be rebased to Y," or whatever. These are trivial for the right person to do, but often hard for the submitter. On the maintainer side, I spend a lot of time trying to coordinate between patchwork (as a to-do list) and mutt (for reviewing and applying patches). It's a lot of pointing and clicking for not much real value. I know I could benefit from learning how other people do this, because I'm sure I'm not doing it the best way. Bjorn