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 28D48D9F for ; Mon, 9 Sep 2019 08:39:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mga04.intel.com (mga04.intel.com [192.55.52.120]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7552CEC for ; Mon, 9 Sep 2019 08:39:04 +0000 (UTC) From: Jani Nikula To: Olof Johansson , Linus Torvalds In-Reply-To: References: <20190830031720.GA7490@mit.edu> <20190830135857.GF7013@google.com> <20190902222240.GE3367@mit.edu> <574c0ccd-730a-eada-966c-58f5de7c9477@redhat.com> <20190903172708.qrvaad2paze6ifhz@chatter.i7.local> <20190904120843.GD4811@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> <20190904134706.GA14421@pure.paranoia.local> <87lfv3w3v6.fsf@intel.com> Date: Mon, 09 Sep 2019 11:40:05 +0300 Message-ID: <87imq1x3q2.fsf@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Cc: Bjorn Helgaas , Konstantin Ryabitsev , ksummit Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] Topics for the Maintainer's Summit List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Fri, 06 Sep 2019, Olof Johansson wrote: > Random observation: We're slowly migrating closer to the "web" based > model of github/gitlab/bitbucket where changes come in via a merge > request + branch, but we would be reconstructing it out of email with > the cover letter equivalent of the merge request description, etc. > That's obviously not a problem, just an interesting observation. Well, as I tried to explain up-thread, I think it *is* a problem we're building infrastructure on top of git send-email and am, while we have git push and pull. Trying to reconstruct everything from email is problematic because it is lossy. We can still have the review on emailed patches, and we could still use git am to apply patches from email, with better reliability if the sending was done by a service in, say, kernel.org control. Though if we had the series automatically available in a branch, I'd think people would move over to picking up the commits from git. And email would only be used for communication, not data transfer. > The final step of merging it in is still manual in our setup, and > that's what most maintainers still prefer; the "hands off" part of the > web model where you don't actively download and look at the code is > what feels less careful and involved at least for me. Plus the fact > that the master contents of the tree would reside up somewhere on the > internet instead of on the maintainers locally controlled machine with > the trust complications involved in that. I'm suggesting maintainers would still have their trees wherever they feel comfortable having them. I find it hard to understand why emailed patches would somehow be inherently safer and more trustworthy than git pull. BR, Jani. -- Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center