Messages in this thread | | | From | Jonathan Corbet <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH docs v3] docs: maintainer: document expectations of small time maintainers | Date | Fri, 21 Jul 2023 13:53:08 -0600 |
| |
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org> writes:
> We appear to have a gap in our process docs. We go into detail > on how to contribute code to the kernel, and how to be a subsystem > maintainer. I can't find any docs directed towards the thousands > of small scale maintainers, like folks maintaining a single driver > or a single network protocol. > > Document our expectations and best practices. I'm hoping this doc > will be particularly useful to set expectations with HW vendors. > > Reviewed-by: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch> > Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> > Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org> > Reviewed-by: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> > Reviewed-by: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@nvidia.com> > Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org> > --- > v3: > - clarify that mailings list in addition to humans is fine (Mark) > - reword the "review from one maintainer is enough" (Benjamin) > - grammar fixes (Benjamin, Shannon) > - typos (Andrew, Shannon) > v2: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230718155814.1674087-1-kuba@kernel.org/ > - use Thorsten's wording for bug fixing requirements > - put more words into the review/response timeline expectations > v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230713223432.1501133-1-kuba@kernel.org/
It sure seems to me that the time has come to apply this before I need a bigger disk to hold all the Reviewed-by tags ... :) So I have done so, thanks.
jon
| |