From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net>
To: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>,
Allison Henderson <allison.henderson@oracle.com>,
Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com>,
Catherine Hoang <catherine.hoang@oracle.com>,
Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
Eryu Guan <guaneryu@gmail.com>,
Gao Xiang <hsiangkao@linux.alibaba.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
Chandan Babu R <chandanrlinux@gmail.com>,
Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
Bill O'Donnell <billodo@redhat.com>,
Shiyang Ruan <ruansy.fnst@fujitsu.com>
Cc: xfs <linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: XFS Sprints
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2021 09:01:30 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3475534f-dd71-978a-0690-f54b5631a9d7@sandeen.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210916023652.GA34820@magnolia>
Hi Darrick -
Just wanted to chime in with my support for this approach - both the
more collaborative concept, and the planning specifics. And I think
those will go hand in hand. If specific goals (patchsets) are agreed on
for a release, it will be easier for people to focus and help get those
goals accomplished.
Thanks for thinking about this and proposing a plan. It might take a
little time to shift behaviors and expectations, but I think this is
totally worth a shot.
Thanks,
-Eric
On 9/15/21 9:36 PM, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> Hi again,
>
> Now that 5.15-rc1 is past, I would like to say something:
>
> I've been reflecting on my (sharply higher) stress levels in 2021, and
> realized that I don't enjoy our development process anymore. One of the
> nice things about being a co-maintainer is that I can take advantage of
> the fact that suggesting improvements == leadership, though that comes
> with the responsibility that leadership == actually making it happen.
>
> The thing that has been bothering me these past few months is how we
> decide what's going into the next merge window. People send patchsets
> at various points between the second week of the merge window and the
> week after -rc6, and then ... they wait to see if anyone will actually
> read them. I or one of the maintainers will get to them eventually, but
> as a developer it's hard to know if nobody's responding because they
> don't like the patchset? Or they're quietly on leave? Or they're
> drowning trying to get their own patchsets out to the list? Or they
> have too many bugs to triage and distro kernel backports? Or they're
> afraid of me?
>
> Regardless, I've had the experience that it's stressful as the
> maintainer looking at all the stuff needing review; it's stressful as a
> developer trying to figure out if I'm /really/ going to make any
> progress this cycle; and as a reviewer it's stressful keeping up with
> both of these dynamics. I've also heard similar sentiments from
> everyone else.
>
> The other problem I sense we're having is implied sole ownership of
> patchesets being developed. Reviewers make comments, but then it seems
> like it's totally on the developer (as the applicant) to make all those
> changes. It's ... frustrating to watch new code stall because reviewers
> ask for cleanups and code restructuring that are outside of the original
> scope of the series as a condition for adding a Reviewed-by tag... but
> then they don't work on those cleanups.
>
> At that point, what's a developer to do? Try to get someone else's
> attention and start the review process all over again? Try to get
> another maintainer's attention and have them do it? This last thing is
> hard if you're already a maintainer, because doing that slows /everyone/
> down.
>
> (And yes, I've been growing our XFS team at Oracle this year so that
> this doesn't seem so one-sided with RedHat.)
>
> I've also heard from a few of you who find it offputting when patches
> show up with verbiage that could be interpreted as "I know best and
> won't take any further suggestions". I agree with your feelings when
> I hear complaints coming in, because my own thoughts had usually already
> been "hmm, this sounds preemptively defensive, why?"
>
> Ok, so, things I /do/ like:
>
> During the 5.15 development cycle I really enjoyed going back and forth
> with Dave over my deferred inode inactivation series and the log
> speedups that we were both proposing. I learned about percpu lists, and
> I hope he found it useful to remember how that part of the inode cache
> works again. This dialectic was what drew me to XFS back in 2014 when I
> started working on reflink, and I've been missing it, especially since
> the pandemic started.
>
> So the question I have is: Can we do community sprints? Let's get
> together (on the lists, or irc, wherever) the week after -rc2 drops to
> figure out who thinks they're close to submitting patchsets, decide
> which one or two big patchsets we as a group want to try to land this
> cycle, and then let's /all/ collaborate on making it happen. If you
> think a cleanup would be a big help for someone else's patchset, write
> those changes and make that part happen.
>
> There's never been a prohibition on us working like that, but I'd like
> it if we were more intentional about working like a coordinated team to
> get things done. What do you all think?
>
> (Small changes and bug fixes can be sent any time and I'll take a look
> at them; I'm not proposing any changes to that part of the process.)
>
> --D
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-09-22 14:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-09-16 2:36 XFS Sprints Darrick J. Wong
2021-09-16 9:50 ` Carlos Maiolino
2021-09-16 12:24 ` [External] : " Chandan Babu R
2021-09-16 13:18 ` Carlos Maiolino
2021-09-22 14:01 ` Eric Sandeen [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3475534f-dd71-978a-0690-f54b5631a9d7@sandeen.net \
--to=sandeen@sandeen.net \
--cc=allison.henderson@oracle.com \
--cc=bfoster@redhat.com \
--cc=billodo@redhat.com \
--cc=catherine.hoang@oracle.com \
--cc=chandanrlinux@gmail.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=guaneryu@gmail.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=hsiangkao@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ruansy.fnst@fujitsu.com \
--cc=sandeen@redhat.com \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).