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 A75BEF98 for ; Thu, 20 Sep 2018 11:49:16 +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 399A442D for ; Thu, 20 Sep 2018 11:49:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-it0-f65.google.com with SMTP id h23-v6so11883156ita.5 for ; Thu, 20 Sep 2018 04:49:16 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <4485753.QfrrHSnrUr@avalon> References: <20180910174638.26fff182@vmware.local.home> <6032585.bO9iOMYsh1@avalon> <4485753.QfrrHSnrUr@avalon> From: Daniel Vetter Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2018 13:49:14 +0200 Message-ID: To: Laurent Pinchart Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Cc: James Bottomley , ksummit Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] Bug-introducing patches List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 1:08 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > On Thursday, 20 September 2018 14:00:47 EEST Daniel Vetter wrote: >> On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 12:10 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote: >> > On Thursday, 20 September 2018 12:02:33 EEST Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> >> Honestly, do we have any research data on how many people actually are >> >> put off by the "unfriendly" e-mail use for patch review requirement or is >> >> it just pure speculation? >> > >> > I believe Daniel has more information. >> >> I think 2 people left the drm/i915 team (and kernel development at >> large) explicitly because of our archaic toolchain. A pile more left, >> where the archaic toolchain at least motivated a switch in >> teams/projects. No solid data yet on what happens when we'd enable >> merge request, but some of the engineers (who never contributed to the >> kernel before) I've chatted with are absolutely raving about the mere >> possibility even if very small&distant. > > Have you asked them for precise points that bother them (up to the point they > wouldn't contribute) in the existing process ? Frankly, I was a bit much in denial that patches on mailing lists might not be the most awesome thing ever. One of them spent cocnsiderable time working on the fd.o patchwrok, in a in hindsight futile attempt to fix things up. So I guess it's all the reasons already discussed on why patchwork isn't really the promised land that can make sense of the chaos on mailing lists. >> This might be biased towards coporate teams, since I have no data on the >> people who might join as volunteers or from random places - I only know this >> because they all worked for Intel. > > Thank you for providing a bit of data. > >> Also, no data ofc about how many we might lose if we force a merge >> request flow instead of patches scribbled on chalk boards :-) > > Is that the opposite of the patches through instagram workflow ? :-) Ah, should have looked up the quote first. It's "patches carved into stone tablets": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8OOzaqS37s -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch