[Ksummit-2012-discuss] [ATTEND] Building up younger contributors and high volume trees
broonie at sirena.org.uk
Fri Jun 22 11:52:02 UTC 2012
On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 06:43:49PM +0800, Jeff Liu wrote:
> On 06/22/2012 02:55 PM, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
> > However, I didn't exactly get what you meant by
> > having new trees for each subsystem. Don't we already have enough development
> > trees (atleast one for each of the major subsystems) that eventually feed
> > linux-next? Or maybe you meant something else and I missed your point..
> > (perhaps you were trying to outline how the work involved in managing these
> > trees could be split up for faster response times?)
> I feel Josef's opinion is if we have a sub-maintainer who could help
> merging those patch sets which are qualified and most likely to be
> accepted by the project to a xxx-next tree, so that the contributers
> don't need to re-send the patches again if they already hit xxx-tree.
> At least, it could reduce the exposure rate of [PATCH RESEND] on the
> mailing list.
I think this is basically the same thing that patchwork is trying to do,
I guess some people might be happier with this than with patchwork but
it all comes down to maintainer reliability really.
> And also, the sub-maintainer could give response to contributers in a
> relatively fast point, like a project coordinator maybe.
> This might could also make the lead maintainer's life a bit easier,
> since the leader could pick up the desired patches from that xxx-next
> tree directly.
This already happens quite a lot anyway, there's lots of people
reviewing things that they aren't specifically maintainers for and it is
helpful to maintainers to see those reviews especially from people they
know do good reviews for the relevant area.
More information about the Ksummit-2012-discuss