lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Jun]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: 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


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-06-12 14:09    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans