Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 17 Jun 2012 11:35:27 +0800 | From | Fengguang Wu <> | Subject | Re: Reducing the noise level of build error notifications to 0 |
| |
On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 08:27:20AM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 12:20:10PM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote: > > > > How about also cc: not only the author where you mention it above, but > > > > everyone who signed-off on the patch? That would provide a bit of peer > > > > pressure to ensure that the problems get fixed. > > > > > > That's (interesting and) good point. If me understand you right: > > > > > > - TO: author, CC: Signed-off-by, CC: (sub-)subsystem mailing list > > > for build errors > > > > > > - TO: author, CC: Signed-off-by (but sure, remove the top level busy maintainers) > > > for gcc warnings > > Well, if I sign-off on a patch, I want to know about gcc warnings that > were added by it, don't not email me just because you think I'm busy.
OK :)
> > Or, just remove the committer from CC: and add Reviewed-by to CC: > > By reviewing, one should already be familiar with the patch. > > I don't think you should drop the committer, but maybe that's just me.
Understand. Let's default to CC all signers and committer.
> > > - TO: author > > > for sparse warnings (however I'm still too afraid to enable sparse checks) > > This might get tougher in some areas of the kernel like the > drivers/staging/ tree where people incrementally fix things up, like fix > trailing space issues on one patch, which doesn't change the rest of the > line that might have had coding style or sparse issues in it. That's > why I can't always run checkpatch.pl on patches sent to me, and why > sparse might not help out.
Ah got it.
> But, I'd love to see sparse run on other areas of the kernel (i.e. > anything not in drivers/staging/) hopefully it would get those areas > fixed up properly.
Sure, I can blacklist the staging tree and still do sparse notifications for others.
Thanks, Fengguang
| |