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=-2.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 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 09D47C35240 for ; Fri, 31 Jan 2020 05:25:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D30F820CC7 for ; Fri, 31 Jan 2020 05:25:28 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=oracle.com header.i=@oracle.com header.b="UWuN5mff" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726202AbgAaFZ2 (ORCPT ); Fri, 31 Jan 2020 00:25:28 -0500 Received: from userp2130.oracle.com ([156.151.31.86]:56594 "EHLO userp2130.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725954AbgAaFZ2 (ORCPT ); Fri, 31 Jan 2020 00:25:28 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (userp2130.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by userp2130.oracle.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id 00V5Nhg1016118; Fri, 31 Jan 2020 05:25:22 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=oracle.com; h=date : from : to : cc : subject : message-id : mime-version : content-type; s=corp-2019-08-05; bh=Q8K46XY2SN8n0jr4TVed23P9qDKr7ITh1g9zSWQV5Nk=; b=UWuN5mffDwa+mn/g1u3Bp18Zd8IjyvUJb4X3V/uYbFbanNeYjPWNz7hmQuUzArd0W6dw B26ZEDJkLmSzb+GAxy7k/ooH2GJCep6RtV8/jZI8xwBsVCzVTSW9i29xRYSz5rC40f9g HF7PQkE/1mglNJdV8rR9d4sU9RSizrY9LcB0bZAMySwRenzRjwGN8Gped8XCJt6MRTFc P7/3dGoYIqPS4y9kf4U6lrHZYh6afjHvo0WivPCFpX06TMBMNnVEF1mDBEVj6cE/n8g9 RewHdyUZ05g4B/N++rKaxfcYR6oAOvm1N1mX6dRCbkMkUYH835dVYw7KfIx/n5BKHW4Z JQ== Received: from userp3020.oracle.com (userp3020.oracle.com [156.151.31.79]) by userp2130.oracle.com with ESMTP id 2xrd3ur60t-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 31 Jan 2020 05:25:22 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (userp3020.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by userp3020.oracle.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id 00V5NJ8Z127896; Fri, 31 Jan 2020 05:25:22 GMT Received: from aserv0122.oracle.com (aserv0122.oracle.com [141.146.126.236]) by userp3020.oracle.com with ESMTP id 2xva6pqak1-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 31 Jan 2020 05:25:22 +0000 Received: from abhmp0016.oracle.com (abhmp0016.oracle.com [141.146.116.22]) by aserv0122.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id 00V5PLjv028148; Fri, 31 Jan 2020 05:25:21 GMT Received: from localhost (/67.169.218.210) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Thu, 30 Jan 2020 21:25:21 -0800 Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2020 21:25:20 -0800 From: "Darrick J. Wong" To: lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, xfs , Eric Sandeen , Eryu Guan Subject: [LSF/MM/BPF TOPIC] FS Maintainers Don't Scale Message-ID: <20200131052520.GC6869@magnolia> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9516 signatures=668685 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=1 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1911140001 definitions=main-2001310047 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9516 signatures=668685 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=1 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1911140001 definitions=main-2001310047 Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Hi everyone, I would like to discuss how to improve the process of shepherding code into the kernel to make it more enjoyable for maintainers, reviewers, and code authors. Here is a brief summary of how we got here: Years ago, XFS had one maintainer tending to all four key git repos (kernel, userspace, documentation, testing). Like most subsystems, the maintainer did a lot of review and porting code between the kernel and userspace, though with help from others. It turns out that this didn't scale very well, so we split the responsibilities into three maintainers. Like most subsystems, the maintainers still did a lot of review and porting work, though with help from others. It turns out that this system doesn't scale very well either. Even with three maintainers sharing access to the git trees and working together to get reviews done, mailing list traffic has been trending upwards for years, and we still can't keep up. I fear that many maintainers are burning out. For XFS, the biggest pain point (AFAICT) is not assembly and testing of the git trees, but keeping up with the mail and the reviews. So what do we do about this? I think we (the XFS project, anyway) should increase the amount of organizing in our review process. For large patchsets, I would like to improve informal communication about who the author might like to have conduct a review, who might be interested in conducting a review, estimates of how much time a reviewer has to spend on a patchset, and of course, feedback about how it went. This of course is to lay the groundwork for making a case to our bosses for growing our community, allocating time for reviews and for growing our skills as reviewers. --- I want to spend the time between right now and whenever this discussion happens to make a list of everything that works and that could be made better about our development process. I want to spend five minutes at the start of the discussion to acknowledge everyone's feelings around that list that we will have compiled. Then I want to spend the rest of the session breaking up the problems into small enough pieces to solve, discussing solutions to those problems, and (ideally) pushing towards a consensus on what series of small adjustments we can make to arrive at something that works better for everyone. --D