| Message ID | 20181026105711.29605-1-cohuck@redhat.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [RFC] MAINTAINERS: clarify some of the tags | expand |
On Fri, 26 Oct 2018 12:57:11 +0200 Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> wrote: > The MAINTAINERS file is a bit sparse on information about what > the different designators are. Let's add some more information > to give contributors a better idea about what the different > roles are. > > Signed-off-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> > --- > > This came out of a discussion about what being a 'reviewer' listed in > this file actually means. A reviewer probably should already have a > track record of doing helpful reviews before being listed in here. > > While at it, I also tried to add some more hints for the other entries. > This patch is supposed to be a starting point for further discussion. Ping. Further discussion would be good :) > > --- > MAINTAINERS | 5 +++++ > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS > index 40672c4eba..7d9dbc6724 100644 > --- a/MAINTAINERS > +++ b/MAINTAINERS > @@ -12,9 +12,14 @@ consult qemu-devel and not any specific individual privately. > Descriptions of section entries: > > M: Mail patches to: FullName <address@domain> > + Maintainers are looking after a certain area and must be CCed on > + patches. They are considered the main contact point. > R: Designated reviewer: FullName <address@domain> > These reviewers should be CCed on patches. > + Reviewers are familiar with the subject matter and provide feedback > + even though they are not maintainers. > L: Mailing list that is relevant to this area > + These lists should be CCed on patches. > W: Web-page with status/info > Q: Patchwork web based patch tracking system site > T: SCM tree type and location. Type is one of: git, hg, quilt, stgit.
On 11/15/18 10:20 AM, Cornelia Huck wrote: > On Fri, 26 Oct 2018 12:57:11 +0200 > Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> wrote: > >> The MAINTAINERS file is a bit sparse on information about what >> the different designators are. Let's add some more information >> to give contributors a better idea about what the different >> roles are. >> >> Signed-off-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> >> --- >> >> This came out of a discussion about what being a 'reviewer' listed in >> this file actually means. A reviewer probably should already have a >> track record of doing helpful reviews before being listed in here. >> >> While at it, I also tried to add some more hints for the other entries. >> This patch is supposed to be a starting point for further discussion. > > Ping. Further discussion would be good :) Recent threads have mentioned the possibility of potentially adding a new category P: for the person that submits pull requests, although I'm not quite sure how that is different from M: as a maintainer >> +++ b/MAINTAINERS >> @@ -12,9 +12,14 @@ consult qemu-devel and not any specific individual privately. >> Descriptions of section entries: >> >> M: Mail patches to: FullName <address@domain> >> + Maintainers are looking after a certain area and must be CCed on >> + patches. They are considered the main contact point. Maybe add something along the lines of "However, a maintainer may accept code that has been reviewed by others without explicitly reviewing it themselves"? >> R: Designated reviewer: FullName <address@domain> >> These reviewers should be CCed on patches. >> + Reviewers are familiar with the subject matter and provide feedback >> + even though they are not maintainers. >> L: Mailing list that is relevant to this area >> + These lists should be CCed on patches. >> W: Web-page with status/info >> Q: Patchwork web based patch tracking system site >> T: SCM tree type and location. Type is one of: git, hg, quilt, stgit. > At any rate, I like the idea of adding the additional descriptions for the categories, even if we still bike-shed on the wording or even the set of categories to use.
Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> writes: > The MAINTAINERS file is a bit sparse on information about what > the different designators are. Let's add some more information > to give contributors a better idea about what the different > roles are. > > Signed-off-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> > --- > > This came out of a discussion about what being a 'reviewer' listed in > this file actually means. A reviewer probably should already have a > track record of doing helpful reviews before being listed in here. > > While at it, I also tried to add some more hints for the other entries. > This patch is supposed to be a starting point for further discussion. > > --- > MAINTAINERS | 5 +++++ > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS > index 40672c4eba..7d9dbc6724 100644 > --- a/MAINTAINERS > +++ b/MAINTAINERS > @@ -12,9 +12,14 @@ consult qemu-devel and not any specific individual privately. > Descriptions of section entries: > > M: Mail patches to: FullName <address@domain> > + Maintainers are looking after a certain area and must be CCed on > + patches. They are considered the main contact point. > R: Designated reviewer: FullName <address@domain> > These reviewers should be CCed on patches. > + Reviewers are familiar with the subject matter and provide feedback > + even though they are not maintainers. > L: Mailing list that is relevant to this area > + These lists should be CCed on patches. > W: Web-page with status/info > Q: Patchwork web based patch tracking system site > T: SCM tree type and location. Type is one of: git, hg, quilt, stgit. Perfect is the enemy of good. This is good. Reviewed-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
On Thu, 15 Nov 2018 10:46:21 -0600 Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com> wrote: > On 11/15/18 10:20 AM, Cornelia Huck wrote: > > On Fri, 26 Oct 2018 12:57:11 +0200 > > Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> wrote: > > > >> The MAINTAINERS file is a bit sparse on information about what > >> the different designators are. Let's add some more information > >> to give contributors a better idea about what the different > >> roles are. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> > >> --- > >> > >> This came out of a discussion about what being a 'reviewer' listed in > >> this file actually means. A reviewer probably should already have a > >> track record of doing helpful reviews before being listed in here. > >> > >> While at it, I also tried to add some more hints for the other entries. > >> This patch is supposed to be a starting point for further discussion. > > > > Ping. Further discussion would be good :) > > Recent threads have mentioned the possibility of potentially adding a > new category P: for the person that submits pull requests, although I'm > not quite sure how that is different from M: as a maintainer Let's wait how that discussion turns out (I'm not quite sure about the semantics, either.) We can document it then. > > >> +++ b/MAINTAINERS > >> @@ -12,9 +12,14 @@ consult qemu-devel and not any specific individual privately. > >> Descriptions of section entries: > >> > >> M: Mail patches to: FullName <address@domain> > >> + Maintainers are looking after a certain area and must be CCed on > >> + patches. They are considered the main contact point. > > Maybe add something along the lines of "However, a maintainer may accept > code that has been reviewed by others without explicitly reviewing it > themselves"? I'm not sure whether that adds vital information. If a maintainer picks a patch that has been reviewed by others, they may or may not do a proper review themselves; but the end result is basically the same (patch makes its way into the tree.) > > >> R: Designated reviewer: FullName <address@domain> > >> These reviewers should be CCed on patches. > >> + Reviewers are familiar with the subject matter and provide feedback > >> + even though they are not maintainers. > >> L: Mailing list that is relevant to this area > >> + These lists should be CCed on patches. > >> W: Web-page with status/info > >> Q: Patchwork web based patch tracking system site > >> T: SCM tree type and location. Type is one of: git, hg, quilt, stgit. > > > > At any rate, I like the idea of adding the additional descriptions for > the categories, even if we still bike-shed on the wording or even the > set of categories to use. What about going with this as a starting point?
On 11/16/18 9:14 AM, Cornelia Huck wrote: >> Recent threads have mentioned the possibility of potentially adding a >> new category P: for the person that submits pull requests, although I'm >> not quite sure how that is different from M: as a maintainer > > Let's wait how that discussion turns out (I'm not quite sure about the > semantics, either.) We can document it then. Indeed, incremental patches are better than doing nothing while waiting for perfection. > >> >>>> +++ b/MAINTAINERS >>>> @@ -12,9 +12,14 @@ consult qemu-devel and not any specific individual privately. >>>> Descriptions of section entries: >>>> >>>> M: Mail patches to: FullName <address@domain> >>>> + Maintainers are looking after a certain area and must be CCed on >>>> + patches. They are considered the main contact point. >> >> Maybe add something along the lines of "However, a maintainer may accept >> code that has been reviewed by others without explicitly reviewing it >> themselves"? > > I'm not sure whether that adds vital information. If a maintainer picks > a patch that has been reviewed by others, they may or may not do a > proper review themselves; but the end result is basically the same > (patch makes its way into the tree.) Okay. There's also the counter argument that too much text makes it something that no one will want to spend time reading, so leaving things concise is desirable. >> At any rate, I like the idea of adding the additional descriptions for >> the categories, even if we still bike-shed on the wording or even the >> set of categories to use. > > What about going with this as a starting point? Yes, works for me. We can always add more patches later if desired.
On Fri, 16 Nov 2018 09:23:27 -0600 Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com> wrote: > On 11/16/18 9:14 AM, Cornelia Huck wrote: > >>>> +++ b/MAINTAINERS > >>>> @@ -12,9 +12,14 @@ consult qemu-devel and not any specific individual privately. > >>>> Descriptions of section entries: > >>>> > >>>> M: Mail patches to: FullName <address@domain> > >>>> + Maintainers are looking after a certain area and must be CCed on > >>>> + patches. They are considered the main contact point. > >> > >> Maybe add something along the lines of "However, a maintainer may accept > >> code that has been reviewed by others without explicitly reviewing it > >> themselves"? > > > > I'm not sure whether that adds vital information. If a maintainer picks > > a patch that has been reviewed by others, they may or may not do a > > proper review themselves; but the end result is basically the same > > (patch makes its way into the tree.) > > Okay. There's also the counter argument that too much text makes it > something that no one will want to spend time reading, so leaving things > concise is desirable. We could also write up a more verbose "patch handling and maintainership guide" or so; but I'd prefer short comments in MAINTAINERS covering the basics only. > > >> At any rate, I like the idea of adding the additional descriptions for > >> the categories, even if we still bike-shed on the wording or even the > >> set of categories to use. > > > > What about going with this as a starting point? > > Yes, works for me. We can always add more patches later if desired. OK, great! Peter, would you consider picking up this one for 3.1? At the very least, it has a R-b from Markus already :)
On 16 November 2018 at 15:33, Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> wrote: > On Fri, 16 Nov 2018 09:23:27 -0600 > Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com> wrote: > >> On 11/16/18 9:14 AM, Cornelia Huck wrote: > >> >>>> +++ b/MAINTAINERS >> >>>> @@ -12,9 +12,14 @@ consult qemu-devel and not any specific individual privately. >> >>>> Descriptions of section entries: >> >>>> >> >>>> M: Mail patches to: FullName <address@domain> >> >>>> + Maintainers are looking after a certain area and must be CCed on >> >>>> + patches. They are considered the main contact point. >> >> At any rate, I like the idea of adding the additional descriptions for >> >> the categories, even if we still bike-shed on the wording or even the >> >> set of categories to use. >> > >> > What about going with this as a starting point? >> >> Yes, works for me. We can always add more patches later if desired. > > OK, great! > > Peter, would you consider picking up this one for 3.1? At the very > least, it has a R-b from Markus already :) Applied to master, thanks -- PMM
diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS index 40672c4eba..7d9dbc6724 100644 --- a/MAINTAINERS +++ b/MAINTAINERS @@ -12,9 +12,14 @@ consult qemu-devel and not any specific individual privately. Descriptions of section entries: M: Mail patches to: FullName <address@domain> + Maintainers are looking after a certain area and must be CCed on + patches. They are considered the main contact point. R: Designated reviewer: FullName <address@domain> These reviewers should be CCed on patches. + Reviewers are familiar with the subject matter and provide feedback + even though they are not maintainers. L: Mailing list that is relevant to this area + These lists should be CCed on patches. W: Web-page with status/info Q: Patchwork web based patch tracking system site T: SCM tree type and location. Type is one of: git, hg, quilt, stgit.
The MAINTAINERS file is a bit sparse on information about what the different designators are. Let's add some more information to give contributors a better idea about what the different roles are. Signed-off-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> --- This came out of a discussion about what being a 'reviewer' listed in this file actually means. A reviewer probably should already have a track record of doing helpful reviews before being listed in here. While at it, I also tried to add some more hints for the other entries. This patch is supposed to be a starting point for further discussion. --- MAINTAINERS | 5 +++++ 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)