From: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>
To: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@kernel.org>
Cc: Simona Vetter <simona.vetter@ffwll.ch>,
linux-media@vger.kernel.org, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
workflows@vger.kernel.org, Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@xs4ll.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] docs: media: document media multi-committers rules and process
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2024 21:08:13 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20241128190813.GB13852@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241128192842.0ce29c88@foz.lan>
On Thu, Nov 28, 2024 at 07:28:42PM +0100, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> Em Wed, 27 Nov 2024 15:48:10 +0100 Simona Vetter escreveu:
>
> > Jumping in the middle here with some clarifications.
> >
> > On Wed, 27 Nov 2024 at 12:19, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 27, 2024 at 10:39:48AM +0100, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> > > > It is somewhat similar to drm-intel and drm-xe, where reviews are part
> > > > of the acceptance criteria to become committers.
> > >
> > > Those are corporate trees, so it's easier to set such rules.
> >
> > Imo it's the other way round, because it's corporate you need stricter
> > rules and spell them all out clearly - managers just love to apply
> > pressure on their engineers too much otherwise "because it's our own
> > tree". Totally forgetting that it's still part of the overall upstream,
> > and that they don't own upstream.
> >
> > So that's why the corporate trees are stricter than drm-misc, but the
> > goals are still exactly the same:
> >
> > - peer review is required in a tit-for-tat market, but not more.
> >
> > - committers push their own stuff, that's all. Senior committers often
> > also push other people's work, like for smaller work they just reviewed
> > or of people they mentor, but it's not required at all.
> >
> > - maintainership duties, like sending around pr, making sure patches dont
> > get lost and things like that, is separate from commit rights. In my
> > opinion, if you tie commit rights to maintainership you're doing
> > something else than drm and I'd more call it a group maintainership
> > model, not a commit rights model for landing patches.
>
> Right now, our focus is for driver maintainers to become committers,
> so they all have maintainership duties as well.
Mauro, that may be your focus, but it's not "ours".
> The requirement we're adding is to ensure that they're doing a
> good work as committers/maintainers, reviewing patches from others,
> as otherwise nobody will do that.
>
> Now, once we start getting drivers with lots of developers working
> on them without maintainership status, we can start including
> them, but this is not our reality, as usually, there is usually
> only one or, at most a couple of developers per driver.
>
> > Anyway just figured I'll clarify what we do over at drm. I haven't looked
> > at all the details of this proposal here and the already lengthy
> > discussion, plus it's really not on me to chime in since I'm not involved.
--
Regards,
Laurent Pinchart
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-11-28 19:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-11-25 13:28 Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2024-11-26 15:19 ` Laurent Pinchart
2024-11-27 9:39 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2024-11-27 11:19 ` Laurent Pinchart
2024-11-27 14:48 ` Simona Vetter
2024-11-28 11:24 ` Jani Nikula
2024-11-28 18:47 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2024-11-28 21:27 ` Jani Nikula
2024-11-28 21:52 ` Simona Vetter
2024-11-29 2:21 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2024-11-29 1:57 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2024-11-28 18:28 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2024-11-28 19:08 ` Laurent Pinchart [this message]
2024-11-27 11:54 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2024-11-27 13:39 ` Laurent Pinchart
2024-11-27 15:09 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2024-11-27 17:59 ` Laurent Pinchart
2024-11-27 11:59 ` Hans Verkuil
2024-11-27 13:25 ` Laurent Pinchart
2024-11-28 18:15 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2024-11-28 19:07 ` Laurent Pinchart
2024-11-29 10:29 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2024-12-02 10:24 ` Laurent Pinchart
2024-11-28 8:19 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2024-11-28 9:31 ` Laurent Pinchart
2024-11-28 17:44 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20241128190813.GB13852@pendragon.ideasonboard.com \
--to=laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=hverkuil@xs4ll.nl \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-media@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mchehab+huawei@kernel.org \
--cc=simona.vetter@ffwll.ch \
--cc=workflows@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox