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 83DF5107C for ; Tue, 11 Sep 2018 15:35:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mx1.suse.de (mx2.suse.de [195.135.220.15]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1E53C782 for ; Tue, 11 Sep 2018 15:35:35 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2018 17:35:32 +0200 (CEST) From: Jiri Kosina To: Linus Torvalds In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Cc: ksummit Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [MAINTAINER SUMMIT] community management/subsystem governance List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Mon, 10 Sep 2018, Linus Torvalds wrote: > For example, we've had the "trivial tree", which tends to be a really > thankless project, that might well be managed way more easily by just > having a random tree that lots of people can commit to, and we could > even encourage the github (gitlab?) model of random non-kernel people > just sending their random trees to it, and have then the group of > committers be able to merge the changes (and at least on github, the > default merge is just a fast-forward, so it actually acts more like a > patch queue than a git tree). > > And the reason I mention the trivial tree is not because the trivial > tree itself is all that interesting or because I'd like to belittle > that model ("that will only work for trivial unimportant stuff"), but > because it might be a good area to experiment in, and a way to get > people used to the flow. For whatever that is worth -- I have had absolutely zero time to maintain that tree for past ~1 year, so I am open to any changes there that would make sense :) Suggestions / help offers welcome. Thanks, -- Jiri Kosina SUSE Labs