[lkml]   [2010]   [May]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] scripts/ default to not include unspecified tags
    On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 08:36:36AM +0200, wrote:
    > This changes the default of the option --git-all-signature-types to be
    > disabled by default.
    > The effect being, that only certain (currently Signed-Off-By:,
    > Acked-By: and Reviewed-By:) tags are used to get adresses of potential
    > maintainers.
    > Motivated is this change by the desire to not 'spam' people unnecessary:
    > A Tested-By or a Reported-By is not ment as a hint that those people
    > want to/are able to review patches to the code in question.
    > In a quest to find resilient statistics for this i came up with this:
    > I produced a list of all the tag-signers not already covered
    > with a signed-off/acked/reviewed tag somewhere in the last year of git history.
    > Those were 650 addresses of "assumed non-developers".
    > And to check if those "assumed non-developers" are professional
    > testers/reporters worth cc'ing, i then counted their total appearences
    > in the git log:
    > 469 were mentioned only once.
    > 123 were mentioned twice.
    > 38 three times
    > 8 four times
    > 5 six times
    > 5 five times
    > 1 eight times
    > 1 fourteen times
    > I believe this supports my thesis, that the ''non-maintainer-tags'' are
    > not actively useful for patch-review. (except probably the guy
    > mentioned fourteen times...)
    > But of course one could also find arguments to poke holes in this
    > statistics, for example does this statistic not include code-locality:
    > A tested-by on a patch that touches some specific piece of
    > code can be more worth than a signed-off in another part of the tree.
    > But... let's play it safe and let's err on the "safe" side
    > meaning to not spam those people when in doubt. We already have the
    > signed-off's and Maintainers file. So this should be ok. And if need be,
    > the maintainers can always forward the patch.
    > [i probably could make a diploma thesis out of this changelog :)]


    > Signed-off-by: Florian Mickler <>

    I second this reasoning:

    Acked-by: Wolfram Sang <>

    Pengutronix e.K. | Wolfram Sang |
    Industrial Linux Solutions | |
    [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
     \ /
      Last update: 2010-05-12 11:27    [W:0.024 / U:0.368 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site