login
Login
/
Register
Search
Search this site:
Forums
News
Blogs
Features
Site
Home
»
Mailing list archives
»
linux-kernel
»
2007
»
October
»
8
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
view
thread
Previous message: [
thread
] [
date
] [
author
]
Next message: [
thread
] [
date
] [
author
]
[view in full thread]
From: Rafael J. Wysocki
Subject:
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
Date: Monday, October 8, 2007 - 3:18 pm
On Monday, 8 October 2007 23:38, Theodore Tso wrote:
quoted text
> On Mon, Oct 08, 2007 at 01:33:38PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > > Uhm, no. There is no reason an "unimportant" person couldn't review a > > patch, and therefore perform a potentially highly valuable service to > > the maintainer. > > > > None of these are indicative of the authority of the person acking, > > reviewing, testing, or nacking. That's only as good as the trust in the > > person signing. > > I would tend to agree. Right now I think the problem is that we are > getting too little reviews, not enough. And someone who reviews > patches, even if unknown, could be building up expertise that > eventually would make them a valued developer, even while they are > doing us a service. > > The concern that I suspect some people have is what if this gets > abused by people who don't really bother to do a full review of a > patch before they ack it. We could ask reviewers to include a URL to > an LKML archive of their review, to make it easier to find a review of > a patch so later on people can judge how effective they their review > was. Unfortunately, this would be an added burden for the regular > reviewers, so I doubt this would be well accepted as a practice. My > suggestion is to not worry about this for now, and see how well it > works out in practice. If we start getting half a dozen or more > Reviewed-by: where the patch is pretty clearly not getting adequately > reviewed, or where someone is obviously abusing the system, and social > pressures aren't working, we can try to figure out then how we want to > address that problem then. Let's not make the process too complicated > unless we know it's necessary. Premature complexity is almost as bad > as premature optimization....
I agree. Greetings, Rafael -
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to
majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at
http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at
http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Previous message: [
thread
] [
date
] [
author
]
Next message: [
thread
] [
date
] [
author
]
Messages in current thread:
RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Jonathan Corbet
, (Mon Oct 8, 10:24 am)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Pekka Enberg
, (Mon Oct 8, 10:31 am)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Sam Ravnborg
, (Mon Oct 8, 10:37 am)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Jan Engelhardt
, (Mon Oct 8, 10:45 am)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Jeremy Fitzhardinge
, (Mon Oct 8, 11:01 am)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Randy Dunlap
, (Mon Oct 8, 11:06 am)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Jeremy Fitzhardinge
, (Mon Oct 8, 11:16 am)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Stefan Richter
, (Mon Oct 8, 11:26 am)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Stefan Richter
, (Mon Oct 8, 11:34 am)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Mark Gross
, (Mon Oct 8, 11:40 am)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Roland Dreier
, (Mon Oct 8, 11:40 am)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, J. Bruce Fields
, (Mon Oct 8, 11:52 am)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Stefan Richter
, (Mon Oct 8, 11:53 am)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Stefan Richter
, (Mon Oct 8, 12:04 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Al Viro
, (Mon Oct 8, 12:05 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Jonathan Corbet
, (Mon Oct 8, 12:08 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Scott Preece
, (Mon Oct 8, 12:26 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Scott Preece
, (Mon Oct 8, 12:35 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Rafael J. Wysocki
, (Mon Oct 8, 1:16 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, H. Peter Anvin
, (Mon Oct 8, 1:33 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Theodore Tso
, (Mon Oct 8, 2:38 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Rafael J. Wysocki
, (Mon Oct 8, 3:18 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Jonathan Corbet
, (Mon Oct 8, 3:43 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Randy Dunlap
, (Mon Oct 8, 4:06 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Oleg Verych
, (Mon Oct 8, 4:20 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, J. Bruce Fields
, (Mon Oct 8, 4:30 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Stefan Richter
, (Mon Oct 8, 4:42 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Steven Rostedt
, (Mon Oct 8, 7:07 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Stephen Hemminger
, (Mon Oct 8, 8:34 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Stefan Richter
, (Mon Oct 8, 11:11 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Sam Ravnborg
, (Mon Oct 8, 11:27 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Stefan Richter
, (Mon Oct 8, 11:39 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Stefan Richter
, (Mon Oct 8, 11:47 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Alan Cox
, (Tue Oct 9, 3:28 am)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Scott Preece
, (Wed Oct 10, 6:40 am)
Navigation
Create content
Mailing list archives
Recent posts
Popular discussions
linux-kernel
:
Greg Kroah-Hartman
[PATCH 17/36] sysdev: detect multiple driver registrations
Sam Ravnborg
Re: [PATCH] kbuild: fix make V=1
Nick Piggin
Re: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures
Greg Kroah-Hartman
[PATCH 16/36] driver core: cpu: fix section mismatch in cpu.c:store_online
Greg Kroah-Hartman
[PATCH 22/36] PM: Make wakeup flags available whenever CONFIG_PM is set
git
:
Stephen R. van den Berg
Re: [RFC] origin link for cherry-pick and revert
Junio C Hamano
Re: [PATCH 1/2] Teach git-describe to display distances from tags.
Johannes Schindelin
Re: [PATCH 2/2] git-svn: support fetch with autocrlf on
Junio C Hamano
Re: [PATCH 6/6] Teach core object handling functions about gitlinks
Johannes Schindelin
Re: Git checkout preserve timestamp?
linux-netdev
:
Jarek Poplawski
Re: [PATCH] flush_work_sync vs. flush_scheduled_work Re: [PATCH] PHYLIB: IRQ event...
Lennert Buytenhek
Re: Distributed Switch Architecture(DSA)
Daniel Schaffrath
Re: tcp bw in 2.6
Guo-Fu Tseng
Re: jme: UDP checksum error, and lots of them
Gerrit Renker
[PATCH 37/37] dccp: Debugging functions for feature negotiation
openbsd-misc
:
Claudio Jeker
Re: Vlan Tag on Vlan Tag (l2tunneling)
Josh Grosse
ssh/sshd challenge-response seems to have stopped working in -current
Pieter Verberne
File collision while using pkg_add
Tomas Bodzar
bsd: uvm_mapent_alloc: out of static map entries
Community First Financial
Teacher A+ Loan
git-commits-head
:
Linux Kernel Mailing List
ath9k_htc: Allocate URBs properly
Linux Kernel Mailing List
ath9k: Added get_survey callback in order to get channel noise
Linux Kernel Mailing List
tracing: protect reader of cmdline output
Linux Kernel Mailing List
kconfig: recalc symbol value before showing search results
Linux Kernel Mailing List
swsusp: provide users with a hint about the no_console_suspend option
Colocation donated by:
Syndicate