[lkml]   [2020]   [May]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH v13 00/11] Convert PWM period and duty cycle to u64
On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 07:44:34AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Apr 2020, Guru Das Srinagesh wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 07:43:03AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > > A great deal of mailing lists contain numerous protections against
> > > things like flooding and spamming. One of those protections is a
> > > check for "Too many recipients to the message". Most of the time this
> > > simply requires moderator intervention by way of review and approval,
> > > but this ultimately depends on the ML's configuration.
> > >
> > > The first thing to ascertain is why your recipients list is so large.
> > > Have you added every reviewer, subsystem-maintainer, maintainer and
> > > contributor suggested by If so, consider pruning
> > > that a little. Contributors do not tend to care about subsequent
> > > changes to a file. As someone who receives a lot of patches, I tend
> > > to get fed-up when receiving patches simply because I made a change X
> > > years ago. Stick to listed maintainers/reviewers in the first
> > > instance and see how far that takes you.
> >
> > Thank you for the detailed reply. I did this in the first few patchsets
> > and then when a few patches didn't get any attention, expanded the
> > audience thus. Still, around 50% of the patches in this series remain
> > unreviewed by anyone.
> This isn't a reason to add more recipients (who are likely to care
> even less than your original group). However it *is* a good argument
> for including all of the specified maintainers/reviewers in on all of
> the patches.
> > > If your recipients list is as succinct as reasonably possible, maybe
> > > just accept that every version isn't going to be archived by every
> > > ML. It's still much more useful for the correct people to have
> > > visibility into the set than for it to be archived multiple times.
> >
> > Thank you, will prune the list and remove past contributors from the
> > Cc-list and add all parties to all patches.
> Great. Once you've done that, we can start to help you acquire the
> Acks you need on your remaining patches.

Hi Lee, Thierry, Uwe,

In v14 of this patchset I've pruned the list of contributors, removed
past contributors from the cc-list, and added all parties to all patches
(except for the patches that are yet to reviewed, for which I've added
what showed me). I've also resent v14 a couple of
times already, with around a week's time interval between resends, and
somehow it seems like this set has lost traction.

Could you please indicate what next steps I should take to have more
eyes on the unreviewed patches? Only 4 out of 11 patches remain

Thank you.

Guru Das.

 \ /
  Last update: 2020-05-21 01:16    [W:0.075 / U:0.228 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site