From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.zeus03.de (zeus03.de [194.117.254.33]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 594AA18FC9F for ; Fri, 14 Jun 2024 09:15:12 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=194.117.254.33 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1718356518; cv=none; b=cb2sfGp3mwp2Bstnnlor3aS9Mj3ci19rdPTuC/J1RSxft0rsN0dYwQtxA61F7L+R8tYTatmOON1N2pBLMFuwuDuBbkvOZw8dNtxXhtWyj7qEQE8sw1zXtq9AQZnlSGcCSAYv9MgV3w0kWYnhJU1rBcxByUOdVQmFgDxyCFPRhDM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1718356518; c=relaxed/simple; bh=rGjFgy1zj19TJpINVpqnoToyeLbd+YihGWRM0gkxp9E=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=fiUAwbOwPLt+zYfTnExYDXlRH+tUe1GGf2mDPAmQ0SwFlTAuqHPqoaSat9kXbLHwoT08FGAg8jdWCxGY5aSEb3LOIA+QaL5kLOc0GqbpcgXmSi176nvYLfHoQHbxZFujt4GS0JJvP8HDyi384tJQHnFKX4LI9WkubIULAENzwMU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=sang-engineering.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sang-engineering.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sang-engineering.com header.i=@sang-engineering.com header.b=Y8kif0iF; arc=none smtp.client-ip=194.117.254.33 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=sang-engineering.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sang-engineering.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sang-engineering.com header.i=@sang-engineering.com header.b="Y8kif0iF" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= sang-engineering.com; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; s=k1; bh=v/bv 9snJ/HzHdR/e8VJLbcHUG8LzAg+CMyj1aMYLbmE=; b=Y8kif0iFlALdV7gyT89m 2iXvkJ+hdj5RMyjy4m0fRIbu+KZ7bg9sKOEW0cw0getlwrBYYFfMy0AZ933pJSvV ZPJOVLlaTfSV9MUkQ2Cp0SVUcdtGbdGUwsAQxC4mjNQnqzOm+mY0PxlSY08TipuN zJaSGUdxHgwex5NhGTSgo/P2Lq9jRi/daohhIRfQvY98VZnq2GcuR0Ylgss1V+V2 wKQJxoRDN/L7p6VpP4XWouzwkDrtJL0Wol/ymoGsuMYjtrfVQfCR/NSq9CbKQUDI dsY3nELFBMtRvxPfFU+LgbmYNpDUe+s0NNcVJ4/NaoMpQW4l0rFPm5vzhQUcAUTj vw== Received: (qmail 1457823 invoked from network); 14 Jun 2024 11:15:09 +0200 Received: by mail.zeus03.de with ESMTPSA (TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 encrypted, authenticated); 14 Jun 2024 11:15:09 +0200 X-UD-Smtp-Session: l3s3148p1@Z39bDdYaNLggAwDPXzjQABqqX1QYyOSW Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2024 11:15:09 +0200 From: Wolfram Sang To: Mark Brown Cc: Steven Rostedt , Jiri Kosina , ksummit@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] Merge tree too flat? Message-ID: References: <20240604182137.2cfdc0b2@gandalf.local.home> <20240604184506.007c4682@gandalf.local.home> <356ad539-3b37-4ada-8344-45ed938c02c5@sirena.org.uk> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: ksummit@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="qv3c3bm5u6kdrkfa" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <356ad539-3b37-4ada-8344-45ed938c02c5@sirena.org.uk> --qv3c3bm5u6kdrkfa Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline > I don't think the mechanics of how patches get moved about has a huge > impact on the effort involved 50:50, in my case. > - trust and delegation make much more of a difference. I've got > several areas where other people are reviewing large volumes of > patches before I ever see them, This is also true for me. When I called out for per-driver maintainers, this made the flood of patches bearable. All of the driver maintainers prefer to review only, though, and let me handle the rest. This is totally fine with me. I'd likely lose some reviewers if I force to them to provide me with separate branches. The other part is: a few months ago Andi Shyti took over the maintenance of the I2C controller patches. He updates patchwork, handles dependencies, decides on for-current and for-next, writes pull requests... That frees so much time that I have actually time left to work on the core code again and give high-level guidance how to tackle problems. So, this really helps as well. That basically boils down to what I said last year at the Maintainer Summit: In some parts of the Kernel, there is no flexibility to redesign the hierarchy. The limited amount of people interested in maintaining and their needs already shape the workflow. And for me, this is also the primary reason why the merge-tree looks so flat. --qv3c3bm5u6kdrkfa Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEOZGx6rniZ1Gk92RdFA3kzBSgKbYFAmZsChkACgkQFA3kzBSg KbZ/kA/9GvhzkzPjLxKMbW8Sb0AFW/pk8GnK6zWz+piuimhCbag36bH7igRBgJmJ C4A5bbSxsWA/njkw5STao8oBm8qhDKdlyDffb1sd0Z1gi3T3vQKywHlsQa4m5Hdf S2gLPAvvpPufZOjtqlaa74uzEArA0LmdcKfbZsEVtJsZ/HUen25FtgGPxO+hiVX6 T+sZpA8wEe7OqxgPHAZWds2eF81ZS/IpzCuNy0Vm7QbWLl2UaWHWdcBYmgFBuheQ RasY4erPjJy0P1M0Pq/cJttHtTXZuFuAtiTpqHppDVkIKO+lNRGH/Jw2ukCPajfD 5/NGaHgcstrwTE9udynSJd0jYZnzxhMnzW+XGzp79FzuS3ozRA2E7/DlDvMLsHfj ln72E8DQokl3pLZieNufFQe2AYa+VUmFtDN2G4Az0XzHxdFQKCoNEQ+ZdpFsEE83 RJtXMNvxZU9FDYju8S7E87tsMSBk5IfO6b89LwFFvILEVpYpKXlDvTloCyX9Lm1w JbnmlJfr1vtUbtimAf3ZzVy8eGLlQrvsbgK9oHfk6e5Xkd7r3gYv1vzh1rgNT/My iPLJftbS1buxp9n8Kx3GD2iFueiiudOtB30ylvlxNn30sK8HSl5g2MLS7TpdIJrP t1DeJ3OyuXu7FHdNdO5AlSTYd4kFiLZfcYvtWTTqK7eIBAWFb4U= =dU54 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --qv3c3bm5u6kdrkfa--