From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-ej1-f42.google.com (mail-ej1-f42.google.com [209.85.218.42]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B0A314693 for ; Fri, 18 Aug 2023 17:26:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ej1-f42.google.com with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-99d90ffed68so480401566b.0 for ; Fri, 18 Aug 2023 10:26:34 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux-foundation.org; s=google; t=1692379592; x=1692984392; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=r9YPHO+rRGt7JCtuvWtFL8mwoltMJaRR2MGLX89JYgQ=; b=U/I9ASv3eBdAwKyIn8jINyE/0Z0HpSw+bFkXWzeORxkoDtgxLzqj80D59drE4yzYa6 GmSfmHu9WfHtywY6naIDJ7822VQOq1vv6Y89trzpUa8MwTpH0Ely3hHk3Y/qqS6WkBCY SAOyUWZBbl6jSXLE5Wxf1FPoQEHKLS4zLWQJ8= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1692379592; x=1692984392; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=r9YPHO+rRGt7JCtuvWtFL8mwoltMJaRR2MGLX89JYgQ=; b=kRe+vP4vVOntMasxOKgpv1A9YY901vvCGHnZyAQYfJpHfplbJuuFoD/ehJzlAdXr5G W1tgyzrMHdFaJlU99mhykWUs2dtL1eViZkTQBESqVLywFzirZh34PIRHVJwRxtBsD4i4 LtLsoDAD8d8lQbWP0eXnI5B8a4YnE0649Q+My0RXhQ55h2EDvEZsxI8OyqOIJiaMQ50K S7PaS2Rx/04GtKc8M58OUKGrrsHH+z0RDlk2mjEuB2N7ivcgN7w3ardyD0GUdeBGECGX JXJQNyveC6unAjReTQ6PXIzOTXEDPEXKm/UzjtNWi2QhzKeNl46yM8oucp+Eu8cWCh/v /Hdg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yww2hS58o+aEfAlWaPqcc8G/bElVw0KMvbPqdTBrSHPWMFcgkTD j9P3Q8GA5KVhCZXSK8Gte+hp8Uq3gihAo3m8dvANfD98 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFXMnwY5axB8peC9MDjIKWHloSD+AG/55l4u2vLFy9jkf1/iZ3rd8MU9wyxXME9rvbXD6x+aA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:2710:b0:98e:370c:be69 with SMTP id w16-20020a170907271000b0098e370cbe69mr3474730ejk.6.1692379592570; Fri, 18 Aug 2023 10:26:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ej1-f46.google.com (mail-ej1-f46.google.com. [209.85.218.46]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id bs9-20020a170906d1c900b0099bcd1fa5b0sm1415139ejb.192.2023.08.18.10.26.31 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 18 Aug 2023 10:26:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ej1-f46.google.com with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-99d90ffed68so480396166b.0 for ; Fri, 18 Aug 2023 10:26:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:b12:b0:99d:e417:d6fb with SMTP id h18-20020a1709070b1200b0099de417d6fbmr3579367ejl.25.1692379591187; Fri, 18 Aug 2023 10:26:31 -0700 (PDT) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: ksummit@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Linus Torvalds Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2023 19:26:14 +0200 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] Transparency when rejecting patches without technical reason To: Wolfram Sang Cc: ksummit@lists.linux.dev Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 at 13:44, Wolfram Sang wrote: >> > this obviously aims at the rejection of networking patches from Baikal > Electronics in March. I only got to know about this yesterday when > reading comments about Debian now supporting the LoongArch architecture. > > I admit I thought we accept / reject patches purely because of technical > reasons. Honestly, technical reasons are a "minimum requirement". But there are clearly other reasons, and always have been. Including simply the fact that we have to trust the source of the patch. Things like "will you support this going forward". Maintainers have to be comfortable with the source of the code. And not all maintainers can work with all people. That has always been true. This wasn't even remotely a gray area. It's not worth discussing. Linus