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 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19B25C433EF for ; Wed, 29 Sep 2021 16:45:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 018DB61262 for ; Wed, 29 Sep 2021 16:45:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1345641AbhI2QrU (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Sep 2021 12:47:20 -0400 Received: from p3plsmtpa12-04.prod.phx3.secureserver.net ([68.178.252.233]:36158 "EHLO p3plsmtpa12-04.prod.phx3.secureserver.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229561AbhI2QrU (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Sep 2021 12:47:20 -0400 Received: from [192.168.0.100] ([173.76.240.186]) by :SMTPAUTH: with ESMTPSA id Vci9mdy6RbDvjVciAmWVWb; Wed, 29 Sep 2021 09:45:38 -0700 X-CMAE-Analysis: v=2.4 cv=U4ZXscnu c=1 sm=1 tr=0 ts=61549832 a=jWrLioA5F7WmVvax94MGYQ==:117 a=jWrLioA5F7WmVvax94MGYQ==:17 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=m4jEnqaFAAAA:8 a=2L7MFlTnB4VszwA5CYYA:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=H2Gg6w7js8da1G-FyEO3:22 X-SECURESERVER-ACCT: tom@talpey.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/5] ksmbd: a bunch of patches To: Ralph Boehme , Jeremy Allison Cc: Namjae Jeon , linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org, Ronnie Sahlberg , Steve French , Hyunchul Lee , Sergey Senozhatsky References: <20210926135543.119127-1-linkinjeon@kernel.org> <8f57cac6-1c8a-cbce-b245-bb4015575569@samba.org> <79ed52be-c92e-1c62-423f-ee126b3da409@samba.org> <76fcdc45-0a94-d9e6-14c8-1c638d0bd00f@talpey.com> From: Tom Talpey Message-ID: <27908e3e-140e-8c7a-e792-414fec5b5190@talpey.com> Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2021 12:45:37 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.14.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4xfHKPdeBMBg1aMQYqQY5EulpnbNxPLI+qUihUOGK+paiS/jHiJTcnV+4yXFsVFHpDLtno4bVuCbmpj1w7cd3fn1p/sV/PpBldEl4Vcgr0as/yaRSXLEQg zuNDJQFUrSwKFKk2yVL2N3cchyvG5mUKRxv/pxfxJIovq8RrlB7fvXTFUCzFa6M/GaLHXOkcYjui1ywh6Ei3HFyQlq+b69tKViP4bLV/zeD7j66EOrOIMBXq 4U3dfZYS95NWjq2Umz9wq1hdWkdZ1ts4cZ8RPay5n+XDu8rE5TYqTunm557B/X04QeYvuFaEUKsfjMlkx9n6C0G8zGHhaDA4JxM2BQqtYjxgmwnmaLbdKIKt qnqqRq7v2Ct9Hr0E5rX3ZP71N6jH2N7j0TCYv9duwNDfg313/K8= Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org On 9/29/2021 12:38 PM, Ralph Boehme wrote: > Am 29.09.21 um 17:42 schrieb Jeremy Allison: >> On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 11:28:09AM -0400, Tom Talpey wrote: >>> >>> I completely agree that email is inefficient, but git is a terrible >>> way to have a discussion. We should attempt to be sure we have >>> those, and that everybody has a chance to see the proposals without >>> having to go to the web five times a day. >>> >>> Please take this as a request for regular git-send-email updates to >>> this list, so I can see them if I'm not online. Maybe add a boilerplate >>> line to direct to the git repo webui. I'm sure a few others will >>> appreciate it too. >> >> Samba does well with the web-based discussion mechanism >> around merge-requests (MR's) in gitlab. I assume github >> has something similar. >> >> Maybe send the initial patch to the list with a link >> to the github MR so people interested in reviewing/discussing >> can follow along there ? > > well, if I could have it the way I wanted, then this would be it. But I > understand that adopting new workflows is not something I can impose -- > at least not without paying for an insane amount of Lakritz-Gitarren > that I tend to use to bribe metze into doing something I want him to do. :) I'm in for github if you send me some too! https://www.gutschmecker.com/produkt/haevy-metal-salzige-gitarren-10-x-150-g-tuete/ > The problem is not so much doing the *review* on patches sent to the > list. While Samba has moved away from doing review on patch emails, it > can certainly be done. Clearly, this effort bridges the Linux and Samba processes. We can definitely try. I guess I'm going to take some convincing. Tom. > The point is, once you go beyond "review" by taking someone else's > patchset, modifying it deeply, reordering patches, adding patches, > rewriting patches, dropping patches and so on, that's when the > patchset-as-email workflow explodes and coordination via git is needed. > > Once such a collaboratively worked on patchset stabilizes, it can of > course again go to the mailing list. > > -slow >