From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx2.suse.de (mx2.suse.de [195.135.220.15]) (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 961EA70 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 16:13:43 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.221.27]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 854A4B179; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 16:13:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: by quack2.suse.cz (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 277301E37A2; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 18:13:40 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2021 18:13:40 +0200 From: Jan Kara To: Steven Rostedt Cc: James Bottomley , Shuah Khan , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , ksummit@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: [MAINTAINER SUMMIT] Rethinking the acceptance policy for "trivial" patches Message-ID: <20210422161340.GB8755@quack2.suse.cz> References: <20210422123559.1dc647fb@coco.lan> <0d83502f-eb29-9b06-ada8-fcd03f9c87a8@linuxfoundation.org> <20210422115235.0526dabd@gandalf.local.home> 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-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210422115235.0526dabd@gandalf.local.home> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) On Thu 22-04-21 11:52:35, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 08:48:21 -0700 > James Bottomley wrote: > > > On Thu, 2021-04-22 at 08:42 -0700, James Bottomley wrote: > > [...] > > > 2. Improving the requirement for bug fixes and large series, like > > > cover letters to everyone, adding fixes: tag and clear explanation. > > > > Just on this one, can we get the mailing list to help now we're moving > > to a new infrastructure? I was already thinking of asking if it could > > reject email with html parts rather than simply losing it, but perhaps > > it could reject threaded submissions where the cover letter isn't > > correctly cc'd? I know that's a big ask because there has to be an > > easy way to recognize them (heuristics on the PATCH tag?) and a way to > > recognize missing cc's (perhaps simply that someone cc'd on the > > threaded [PATCH x/y] reply isn't cc'd on [PATCH 0/y]?) > > Unfortunately, this breaks all quilt users, as quilt does not support this. Is it that hard to improve quilt? Honza -- Jan Kara SUSE Labs, CR