Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1603413 > unrolled thread

Re: outreachy

Started byPavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
First post2017-03-17 16:30 +0100
Last post2017-03-20 17:40 +0100
Articles 5 — 3 participants

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.


Contents

  Re: outreachy Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> - 2017-03-17 16:30 +0100
    Re: outreachy Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr> - 2017-03-17 18:00 +0100
      Re: outreachy Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> - 2017-03-20 11:30 +0100
        Re: outreachy Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> - 2017-03-20 11:40 +0100
          Re: outreachy Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> - 2017-03-20 17:40 +0100

#1603413 — Re: outreachy

FromPavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Date2017-03-17 16:30 +0100
SubjectRe: outreachy
Message-ID<tm1Zg-8sC-35@gated-at.bofh.it>

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Hi!

> 
> Hah!  That's the joy of being a maintainer of a driver in staging.  Even
> if you filter out outreachy, you are going to get a lot of "basic
> mistakes" and other type patches cc:ed to you.
> 
> I strongly suggest, that if you all don't like this type of stuff,
> either:
> 	- work to get the code out of staging as soon as possible (i.e.
> 	  send me coding style fixes for everything right now, and then
> 	  fix up the rest of the stuff.)
> 	- take yourself off the maintainer list for this code.
> 
> It's your choice, outreachy right now is a lot of patches, but again,
> it's not going to keep you from getting the "basic" stuff sent to you
> in ways that is totally wrong.

Could we get these trivial patches off the lkml? Yes, lkml already has
a lot of traffic, but no, this is not useful :-(.
									
									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]


#1603458

FromJulia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>
Date2017-03-17 18:00 +0100
Message-ID<tm3om-Yu-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1603413

On Fri, 17 Mar 2017, Pavel Machek wrote:

> Hi!
>
> >
> > Hah!  That's the joy of being a maintainer of a driver in staging.  Even
> > if you filter out outreachy, you are going to get a lot of "basic
> > mistakes" and other type patches cc:ed to you.
> >
> > I strongly suggest, that if you all don't like this type of stuff,
> > either:
> > 	- work to get the code out of staging as soon as possible (i.e.
> > 	  send me coding style fixes for everything right now, and then
> > 	  fix up the rest of the stuff.)
> > 	- take yourself off the maintainer list for this code.
> >
> > It's your choice, outreachy right now is a lot of patches, but again,
> > it's not going to keep you from getting the "basic" stuff sent to you
> > in ways that is totally wrong.
>
> Could we get these trivial patches off the lkml? Yes, lkml already has
> a lot of traffic, but no, this is not useful :-(.

The outreachy instructions say to use the -nol argument to
get_maintainers, which would prevent them from being sent to any mailing
list.  However others thought that all patches should be sent to mailing
lists, and so I haven't enforced anything for people who have omitted
-nol.  However I have tried to remove bcm maintainers from CC lists on
replies and reminded people not to send you patches,

julia


>
> 									Pavel
> --
> (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
> (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1604336

FromPavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Date2017-03-20 11:30 +0100
Message-ID<tn2JA-3lh-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1603458

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Hi!

> > > Hah!  That's the joy of being a maintainer of a driver in staging.  Even
> > > if you filter out outreachy, you are going to get a lot of "basic
> > > mistakes" and other type patches cc:ed to you.
> > >
> > > I strongly suggest, that if you all don't like this type of stuff,
> > > either:
> > > 	- work to get the code out of staging as soon as possible (i.e.
> > > 	  send me coding style fixes for everything right now, and then
> > > 	  fix up the rest of the stuff.)
> > > 	- take yourself off the maintainer list for this code.
> > >
> > > It's your choice, outreachy right now is a lot of patches, but again,
> > > it's not going to keep you from getting the "basic" stuff sent to you
> > > in ways that is totally wrong.
> >
> > Could we get these trivial patches off the lkml? Yes, lkml already has
> > a lot of traffic, but no, this is not useful :-(.
> 
> The outreachy instructions say to use the -nol argument to
> get_maintainers, which would prevent them from being sent to any mailing
> list.  However others thought that all patches should be sent to mailing
> lists, and so I haven't enforced anything for people who have omitted
> -nol.  However I have tried to remove bcm maintainers from CC lists on
> replies and reminded people not to send you patches,

Wonderful :-(.

Can we at least make  those people put the word "outreachy" in the
subject so the emails are easier to delete?
									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1604350

FromGreg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Date2017-03-20 11:40 +0100
Message-ID<tn2Tg-3oS-17@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1604336
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 11:20:32AM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> > > > Hah!  That's the joy of being a maintainer of a driver in staging.  Even
> > > > if you filter out outreachy, you are going to get a lot of "basic
> > > > mistakes" and other type patches cc:ed to you.
> > > >
> > > > I strongly suggest, that if you all don't like this type of stuff,
> > > > either:
> > > > 	- work to get the code out of staging as soon as possible (i.e.
> > > > 	  send me coding style fixes for everything right now, and then
> > > > 	  fix up the rest of the stuff.)
> > > > 	- take yourself off the maintainer list for this code.
> > > >
> > > > It's your choice, outreachy right now is a lot of patches, but again,
> > > > it's not going to keep you from getting the "basic" stuff sent to you
> > > > in ways that is totally wrong.
> > >
> > > Could we get these trivial patches off the lkml? Yes, lkml already has
> > > a lot of traffic, but no, this is not useful :-(.
> > 
> > The outreachy instructions say to use the -nol argument to
> > get_maintainers, which would prevent them from being sent to any mailing
> > list.  However others thought that all patches should be sent to mailing
> > lists, and so I haven't enforced anything for people who have omitted
> > -nol.  However I have tried to remove bcm maintainers from CC lists on
> > replies and reminded people not to send you patches,
> 
> Wonderful :-(.
> 
> Can we at least make  those people put the word "outreachy" in the
> subject so the emails are easier to delete?

It's easy for you to filter away as-is if you want to to by just looking
at the cc: list for outreachy right now, don't make a new step for
people to jump through because you don't want to be bothered.  You only
have 10 more days of it if you want to just ignore any patch until
then...

greg k-h

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1604752

FromPavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Date2017-03-20 17:40 +0100
Message-ID<tn8vE-7pZ-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1604350

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Mon 2017-03-20 11:30:08, Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 11:20:32AM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > Hi!
> > 
> > > > > Hah!  That's the joy of being a maintainer of a driver in staging.  Even
> > > > > if you filter out outreachy, you are going to get a lot of "basic
> > > > > mistakes" and other type patches cc:ed to you.
> > > > >
> > > > > I strongly suggest, that if you all don't like this type of stuff,
> > > > > either:
> > > > > 	- work to get the code out of staging as soon as possible (i.e.
> > > > > 	  send me coding style fixes for everything right now, and then
> > > > > 	  fix up the rest of the stuff.)
> > > > > 	- take yourself off the maintainer list for this code.
> > > > >
> > > > > It's your choice, outreachy right now is a lot of patches, but again,
> > > > > it's not going to keep you from getting the "basic" stuff sent to you
> > > > > in ways that is totally wrong.
> > > >
> > > > Could we get these trivial patches off the lkml? Yes, lkml already has
> > > > a lot of traffic, but no, this is not useful :-(.
> > > 
> > > The outreachy instructions say to use the -nol argument to
> > > get_maintainers, which would prevent them from being sent to any mailing
> > > list.  However others thought that all patches should be sent to mailing
> > > lists, and so I haven't enforced anything for people who have omitted
> > > -nol.  However I have tried to remove bcm maintainers from CC lists on
> > > replies and reminded people not to send you patches,
> > 
> > Wonderful :-(.
> > 
> > Can we at least make  those people put the word "outreachy" in the
> > subject so the emails are easier to delete?
> 
> It's easy for you to filter away as-is if you want to to by just looking
> at the cc: list for outreachy right now, don't make a new step for
> people to jump through because you don't want to be bothered.  You only
> have 10 more days of it if you want to just ignore any patch until
> then...

10 more days... I can survive 10 more days. I was afraid we would be
stuck with it "forever".
									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]


Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel


csiph-web