From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47521C2B9F4 for ; Thu, 17 Jun 2021 18:43:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38E7C613FB for ; Thu, 17 Jun 2021 18:43:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233371AbhFQSpm (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Jun 2021 14:45:42 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:36992 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231497AbhFQSpl (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Jun 2021 14:45:41 -0400 Received: from mail-qk1-x72e.google.com (mail-qk1-x72e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::72e]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 72A60C061574 for ; Thu, 17 Jun 2021 11:43:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qk1-x72e.google.com with SMTP id q16so4608909qkm.9 for ; Thu, 17 Jun 2021 11:43:32 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=KSkMrcggjCOoGEJDL1W3dI4ogdg629R++loSanZwrJw=; b=IQ6Q61OfGl9aEOAgh47Bv5MKaeICIQnMHHRXUM1RRRPzvlnsmuAxTUu2eRXL153TgD 6uOpLurz+yqkfFfvJhDVXzq4NJIyvkROyIgyJtw6RusU7Z2vo8bWG9VL7AQ03QAXr2qE CIRm/V+0Pp6igJuXVjeyaJ2FImsbS7OD//VvSaP9vwTSpTglbfCDs3nX/IqMZYOP2vzP 10fx2F0Q66Hzh/jnR150pQFOuJwkBG3KKb8Fqpfe5u8r8l3CiRT+6Y+1EASEDuftkO1e Xp0r3iCf4DxjIgNv7GeFH5lgsfprj6Rf1rrOjasUJvhERBoHvZ9u7YcZBgLNXsRxzRAi DU2A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=KSkMrcggjCOoGEJDL1W3dI4ogdg629R++loSanZwrJw=; b=hDpVBW8dSAj/+WsG7MHJBacBoLDruJl5lje79Wi1LmuVx4R874BZlYkXqXqow+ZfBV IPxG6mBaqYotqiLi/B+ZI/Ku7o8jaOGBjZyF3c+kFvU9ShVJgyDjoaYf5cx4PIoEXZBj SEq/vW2CTaPQk6WmTPt/28Nk4bFKqRlStZRFjj0T9p8har0LqJFodaY0BN0X9g46QDrn VHb9CbqrFA3il2MfoSmBpvxCQmvlLcTUXar+aDVH5xhxKoqZMK+DTJ6jSdgtwpAQebPi GW43p2AzAA6OkmUm//B2/NNpvVRi4uC+oYZd/e4htJt7FpfMi6Dc2ZanK01jps4hEXrc 4QCA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533bgrmj+Wmv239IAgN+fJA+dn9rOKsYUa2mVv+q8ve4XYZgnk4g ooHC5s95fYxggc2CdJwS8JSLZuTR4n2gBVmh2fo= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxF7Rj4MF9jImAHBj7QS4RAAuxUX7v3dws2R3S1ucsExuDiJyh5rblLCJogtTzzE3OxRztJikyM5Hdf5eT7JuI= X-Received: by 2002:a25:cc55:: with SMTP id l82mr8570032ybf.26.1623955411662; Thu, 17 Jun 2021 11:43:31 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210616171813.bwvu6mtl4ltotf7p@nitro.local> <20210617145728.nahkvtxapozccm6c@nitro.local> <20210617151659.GF5067@sirena.org.uk> In-Reply-To: From: Miguel Ojeda Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2021 20:43:20 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: RFC: Github PR bot questions To: Laurent Pinchart Cc: Mark Brown , Konstantin Ryabitsev , Christoph Hellwig , Dmitry Vyukov , Jiri Kosina , users@linux.kernel.org, workflows@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: workflows@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 5:24 PM Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > There are some features (or lack thereof) of git..b that I suspect > actively decrease the quality of the hosted software. For instance, the > inability to comment on the commit messages during review can play a > role in the average low quality of those messages. Similarly, review is It only decreases the quality of the repository if you allow the commits to go in. The same happens in the LKML -- some people have sent bad messages, but we correct them and they learn. Also, as soon as you have a queue of well-written PRs (equivalently: messages in lore), then it is easier for others to know what the customs for a given project are. > Developers who have only been exposed to those platforms are very likely > to never have learnt the importance of commit messages, and of proper > split of changes across commits. Those are issues that are inherent to > those platforms and that we will likely need to handle in an automated > way (at least to some extent) or maintainers will become crazy (I know > we already suffer from those issues with the mailing list-based > workflow, but I believe it would get worse, not better, and some of our > maintainers are already suffering way more than they should). I am not sure it would get worse: in Rust for Linux, contributors that were new to the kernel process learnt quite quickly how to write proper commit messages. I think all depends on how willing to learn people is and how strict maintainers are enforcing things. But I agree that a bot that automatically performs the basic reviews helps *a lot*. Cheers, Miguel