From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) (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 A88E92F9B for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 14:00:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gandalf.local.home (cpe-66-24-58-225.stny.res.rr.com [66.24.58.225]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 623BB6142F; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 14:00:23 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2021 10:00:21 -0400 From: Steven Rostedt To: Sudip Mukherjee Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab , James Bottomley , ksummit@lists.linux.dev, Jiri Kosina Subject: Re: [MAINTAINER SUMMIT] Rethinking the acceptance policy for "trivial" patches Message-ID: <20210422100021.1a3f143c@gandalf.local.home> In-Reply-To: References: <20210422123559.1dc647fb@coco.lan> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.8 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) X-Mailing-List: ksummit@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 12:03:24 +0100 Sudip Mukherjee wrote: > May I suggest that we have a separate tree for trivial patches like > the trivial.git tree that Jiri has and all trivial patches goes Funny that you suggest something that we already have and you mention. Yes Jiri had the trivial tree, but because it ends up being a lot of work, and if the maintainer of that tree doesn't have the time to maintain it, it becomes a dead end for those patches. It requires someone with a good enough reputation to maintain it, and that means most people who have that reputation do not have the time to maintain it ;-) > through that tree. There can be a separate set of reviewers for those > patches who can work under the guidance of GregKH or others who are > looking at trivial patches on a daily basis for staging subsystem. But > I guess the question is where do you draw the boundary of a patch > being trivial or not. The way it use to work was that if a patch was deemed trivial by the maintainer, they could simply Cc the trivial email and say, trivial patch. And then the trivial maintainer (use to be Jiri) would pull it in. It was nice, as I didn't have to worry about putting those patches into my full 13 hour test suite ;-) -- Steve