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 B3A398B4 for ; Fri, 10 Jul 2015 16:07:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.9]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3592314F for ; Fri, 10 Jul 2015 16:07:22 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2015 09:07:14 -0700 From: Darren Hart To: Dan Carpenter Message-ID: <20150710160714.GL111846@vmdeb7> References: <201507080121.41463.PeterHuewe@gmx.de> <559C73DF.2030008@roeck-us.net> <20150708114011.3a1f1861@noble> <2879113.fraeuJIr2M@avalon> <20150709193718.GD9169@vmdeb7> <20150710143641.GW4341@mwanda> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150710143641.GW4341@mwanda> Cc: ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org, Jason Cooper Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] Recruitment (Reviewers, Testers, Maintainers, Hobbyists) List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 05:36:41PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Thu, Jul 09, 2015 at 12:37:18PM -0700, Darren Hart wrote: > > I spend a highly disproportionate amount of my time, relative to measurable > > quality impact to the kernel, going over the nuances of submitting patches. > > > > 1) Must have a complete commit message > > 2) DCO goes above the --- > > 3) Include a patch changelog, do so below --- > > 4) Cc maintainers :-) > > 5) Checkpatch... checkpatch... checkpatch... > > 6) Compiler warnings > > 7) CodingStyle :-) > > 8) Use ascii or utf8 character encodings > > > > The same people who don't run checkpatch.pl will also not opt in to your > QC system. I think they would if it the barrier to use it was lower than LKML. Between our very stringent email formatting requirements and the stigma associated with screwing it up, I think a prominent "Kernel Patch Submitter" web form would be readily used by a lot of first timers. Once they are used to using that and want to move on to a patch series, we can have instructions on how to do that, which might include a web form which accepts a publicly visible git repository url and branch or tag, along with all the other required cover letter stuff as part of a form. (See Steve Rostedts response on web forms) > You should create a procmail filter to processes patches. If the patch > fails then it changes the subject from [patch] to [fail] and stores a > response (compile warnings etc) in a directory. Then you trigger a > macro in mutt and it mails the response. > > Or you could just create a generic form letter like Greg does. > OK, so this is precisely the kind of individually developed special purpose wizardry that I think hinders recruitment. Rather than having every maintainer reinvent this wheel in a subtly different a personal way (which gets back to the issues raised about subtly different expectations per maintainer), it makes a lot of sense to me to create a common infrastructure that we can all use. Thanks, -- Darren Hart Intel Open Source Technology Center