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 ESMTP id 211A1711 for ; Tue, 13 May 2014 14:55:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mx2.suse.de (cantor2.suse.de [195.135.220.15]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9F2C3201A2 for ; Tue, 13 May 2014 14:55:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from relay2.suse.de (charybdis-ext.suse.de [195.135.220.254]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB16BAC47 for ; Tue, 13 May 2014 14:55:11 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 13 May 2014 16:55:11 +0200 Message-ID: From: Takashi Iwai To: Jiri Kosina In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Cc: ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [TOPIC] Guidance for subsystem maintainers List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , At Tue, 13 May 2014 16:31:49 +0200 (CEST), Jiri Kosina wrote: > > On Tue, 13 May 2014, Takashi Iwai wrote: > > > While posting to different subsystem areas, I noticed various ways of > > responses and communications. Some picks up quick, some urges more > > reviews, sometimes a patch gets merged silently after months later, > > etc. Although the variety is one strength of OSS development, it made > > me also wonder whether we need some baseline guidance for subsystem > > maintenance in order to give a better appeal to casual developers. > > > > Is such a thing too much burden to maintainers? Or, is it just a > > bikeshedding? > > I am afraid that any attempt to force any working style on maintainers is > pre-destined to fail. > > As an example, there are folks who love patchwork and others wouldn't dare > to touch it with a 10m pole. > > Even such a "core" thing as git is explicitly claimed optional by Linus. > > Is there perhaps anything more concrete you had on mind? Well, I haven't thought of any policy enforcement, either. The way to maintain codes (git, cvs or whatever) is a free choice, and the way to communicate is also a free choice. That's why I used a term "guidance". But something can be still helpful to be helpful. For example, I always spend long time just to look for how to report a bug in each different subsystem. Or, I become uneasy when a submitted patch don't get any reaction for weeks (yeah, you learn to put always Andrew Morton to Cc :) So, my concern is whether we built some obstacle unnecessarily in front of our community, which might be improved by clarifying some baseline. Takashi