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=-2.9 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_NEOMUTT autolearn=ham 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 9C8E5C04A6B for ; Fri, 10 May 2019 14:12:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7964B2175B for ; Fri, 10 May 2019 14:12:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727521AbfEJOMg (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 May 2019 10:12:36 -0400 Received: from protestant.ebb.org ([50.56.179.12]:49777 "EHLO protestant.ebb.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727843AbfEJOMe (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 May 2019 10:12:34 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 327 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Fri, 10 May 2019 10:12:33 EDT Received: from localhost (unknown [216.161.86.19]) (Authenticated sender: bkuhn) by protestant.ebb.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F058F820B5; Fri, 10 May 2019 07:07:05 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 10 May 2019 06:18:55 -0700 From: "Bradley M. Kuhn" To: linux-spdx@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Workflow Message-ID: <20190510131855.nj6afayza5ewxjur@ebb.org> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-No-Archive: yes X-Archive: no User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) Sender: linux-spdx-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-spdx@vger.kernel.org Thomas Gleixner wrote: > I appreciate the +1, but I would appreciate even more some hint what you > think is a digestible set size and how much time you think it takes to > review such a set. I think these questions are hard to answer until we try some. License provenance review is very different than code review. I suggest we just try it in the batch-size you suggest and then be willing to readjust based on everyone's feedback after doing it for a while. -- Bradley M. Kuhn Pls. support the charity where I work, Software Freedom Conservancy: https://sfconservancy.org/supporter/