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 C152CF0C for ; Tue, 11 Sep 2018 10:17:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-it0-f65.google.com (mail-it0-f65.google.com [209.85.214.65]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 56B2E102 for ; Tue, 11 Sep 2018 10:17:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-it0-f65.google.com with SMTP id u13-v6so750486iti.1 for ; Tue, 11 Sep 2018 03:17:47 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <1536592110.4035.5.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <2620504.doLR7ekjFm@avalon> <878t482zki.fsf@intel.com> From: Daniel Vetter Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2018 12:17:45 +0200 Message-ID: To: Geert Uytterhoeven Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Cc: James Bottomley , ksummit Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [MAINTAINER SUMMIT] community management/subsystem governance List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 12:09 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 12:01 PM Daniel Vetter wrote: >> On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 11:08 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven >> wrote: >> > On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 10:44 AM Jani Nikula wrote: >> >> On Mon, 10 Sep 2018, Laurent Pinchart wrote: >> >> > That's also one of my concerns. The differences between subsystems that all >> >> > use an email-based review process can already be confusing, or just annoying >> >> > to handle, especially when specific tools are mandated (the DRM dim tool or >> >> > the ARM patch system come to mind). >> >> >> >> Note that you don't need to use dim unless you become a committer or a >> >> maintainer to a tree that's maintained using dim. >> > >> > Which unfortunately cannot be said about the ARM patch system... >> >> Is there some docs about this ARM patch systems? Or just a link to >> what it is? I've never heard of it, until this thread here. > > http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/developer/patches/info.php Thanks. > It does take git-send-email patches, IFF they follow the rules. > > I've just discovered it's even linked to from Documentation/arm/README, > which is horridly out-of-date (2.6? FTP?). >>From a quick look: This is essentially another reimplementation of the patchwork idea (but probably predating that)? With the difference it's not all that accepting as patchwork, and it doesn't just automatically read a mailing list en-passant. Or am I off the mark? -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch