Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 12 Jun 2009 14:05:06 +0200 | From | Pavel Machek <> | Subject | Re: HTC Dream aka. t-mobile g1 support |
| |
On Fri 2009-06-12 13:33:21, Ryan Mallon wrote: > Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 05:00:30AM -0700, David Miller wrote: > >> From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> > >> Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 12:49:12 +0100 > >> > >>> I can not keep up with the number of patches that need to be > >>> reviewed and ultimately merged. I know this, and I freely admit it, > >>> and I have done so on many occasions. > >> Then split up the responsibilities to other people instead of being > >> the choke point. Controlling everything isn't so important. > > > > Don't you think that I've been trying to get other people to be more > > involved? > > > > - I've been pushing people to send patches to the relevent mailing > > list(s) and maintainer(s) for years. > > > > - I've been pushing people to send their ARM patches to the ARM > > mailing list rather than directly into the patch system for review > > (it even has a comment telling people this) so that others can get > > involved in reviewing them, and sharing that work load. > > > > Do you think either have been anywhere near successful? > > > > For the most part, the answer is no. People concentrate on their own > > areas, and won't look at someone with a new class of platforms (eg, > > the STMP or W90x900 stuff). > > > > I'd absolutely love it if the review load could be shared, but for the > > most part it just doesn't happen. Everyone's far too busy with their > > own stuff to help out (and that's a reason that they'll give if tackled > > head on about it.) > > Question on this: I occasionally review patches where I have the > knowledge or interest. Most of the time however, I do not have the > hardware needed to actually test the patches, and so my reviews are > simply coding style, etc. I don't want to add my acked-by to something I > can't test, or am not at reasonably confident is okay (ie haven't > tested, but know the hardware well enough to be satisfied the patch is > okay by reading it). > > The problem I see for developers I do reviews for, is that they post a > patch, I do a code review, the post an update looking for an acked-by, > and the best I can say is "looks okay to me, but get someone else to ack > it". Whats the best approach here? Should I just add my Reviewed-by tag, > or should can/should I ack patches where I think the code is okay, but > can't test.
I believe you have slightly higher standards than neccessary/desirable.
I believe it is okay to ack a patch when you don't have a hardware; you can trust original submitter to test it on the hw. As long as the patch is not broken by design, or contain some gross uglyness...
Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
| |