lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Jun]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRe: How to improve the quality of the kernel?
    Date
    On Monday 18 June 2007, Stefan Richter wrote:
    > Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
    > > despite the fact that audit takes
    > > more time/knowledge then making the patch you will end up with zero credit
    > > if patch turns out to be (luckily) correct. Even if you find out issues
    > > and report them you are still on mercy of author for being credited
    >
    > If we introduce a "Reviewed-by" with reasonably clear semantics
    > (different from Signed-off-by; e.g. the reviewer is not a middle-man in
    > patch forwarding; the reviewer might have had remaining reservations...
    > very similar to but not entirely the same as "Acked-by" as currently
    > defined in -mm) --- and also make the already somewhat established
    > "Tested-by" more official, --- then the maintainers could start to make
    > it a habit to add Reviewed-by and Tested-by.
    >
    > Plus, reviewers and testers could formally reply with Reviewed-by and
    > Tested-by lines to patch postings and even could explicitly ask the
    > maintainer to add these lines.

    Sounds great.

    > > so from personal POV you are much better to wait and fix issues after they
    > > hit mainline kernel. You have to choose between being a good citizen and
    > > preventing kernel regressions or being bastard and getting the credit. ;)
    > >
    > > If you happen to be maintainer of the affected code the choice is similar
    > > with more pros for letting the patch in especially if you can't afford the
    > > time to do audit (and by being maintainer you are guaranteed to be heavily
    > > time constrained).
    >
    > I don't think that a maintainer (who signs off on patches after all) can
    > easily afford to take the "bastard approach". I may be naive.

    Well, I'm not doing it myself but I find it tempting... ;)

    In case of being maintainer "bastard approach" is more about not discouraging
    developers by holding patches for too long than about getting credit.

    Bart
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2007-06-18 02:11    [W:0.024 / U:0.512 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site