Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: Add explicit check-in policy section

From: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>
To: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@citrix.com>
Cc: Lars Kurth <lars.kurth@citrix.com>,
	Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>,
	Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>,
	Konrad Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>,
	Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>,
	Tim Deegan <tim@xen.org>, Julien Grall <julien.grall@arm.com>,
	Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>,
	Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@citrix.com>,
	xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: Add explicit check-in policy section
Date: Wed, 8 May 2019 08:32:09 -0700 (PDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1905080830450.9403@sstabellini-ThinkPad-T480s> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190508113947.11920-1-george.dunlap@citrix.com>

On Wed, 8 May 2019, George Dunlap wrote:
> +	Check-in policy
> +	===============
> +
> +In order for a patch to be checked in, in general, several conditions
> +must be met:
> +
> +1. In order to get a change to a given file committed, it must have
> +   the approval of at least one maintainer of that file.
> +
> +   A patch of course needs acks from the maintainers of each file that
> +   it changes; so a patch which changes xen/arch/x86/traps.c,
> +   xen/arch/x86/mm/p2m.c, and xen/arch/x86/mm/shadow/multi.c would
> +   require an Ack from each of the three sets of maintainers.
> +
> +   See below for rules on nested maintainership.
> +
> +2. It must have an Acked-by or a Reviewed-by from someone other than
> +   the submitter.
> +
> +3. Sufficient time must have been given for anyone to respond.  This
> +   depends in large part upon the urgency and nature of the patch.
> +   For a straightforward uncontroversial patch, a day or two is
> +   sufficient; for a controversial patch, longer (maybe a week) would
> +   be better.
> +
> +4. There must be no "open" objections.
> +
> +In a case where one person submits a patch and a maintainer gives an
> +Ack, the Ack stands in for both the approval requirement (#1) and the
> +Acked-by-non-submitter requirement (#2).
> +
> +In a case where a maintainer themselves submits a patch, the
> +Signed-off-by meets the approval requriment (#1); so an Ack or Review
> +from anyone in the community suffices for requirement #2.

Not that I am opposed to it, but this is not how Julien and I have been
working so far: when one of us sends a patch the other needs to review
it or at least ack it.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel