Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] Keeping reviews meaningful

[Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1411 bytes --]


> > Guys, I am just trying to better cope with an amount of patches I can't
> > handle on my own currently.
> 
> Maintainers don't scale right? :/

Yup, no news here.

> What I tend to do is git log on whatever is affected by a patch
> and then pick some people who touched the code recently
> and just add them to CC and ask them to help. This is especially

I do this, too. I also ask people from the same company as the patch
author to jump in.

> nice with drivers as I can quickly see (by intuition) whether
> they are doing some general cleanup or actually are running
> and testing the hardware, even if they didn't sign up as
> maintainers. Sometimes nudge them to maintain the stuff
> they seem so intimate with by adding themselves to
> MAINTAINERS.

I do this, too, and it works OK. I got a few driver maintainers listed.
Some are really active which is nice, some disappear again which is sad
but not too surprising. Yet, for every active new maintainer, I have to
check how they review.

This is what I mean with "trust matrix getting complex". Lots of new
maintainers where I need to build some trust relationship. Maybe it is
just a workflow thing, yet I feel I need some kind of tracking to do
this. And other stuff I mentioned in my initial mail, especially a short
summary of the review and a higher awareness that reviews can be
constructively criticized.


[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]