On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 1:32 AM, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 8:11 PM, Sean Paul <seanpaul@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 06:08:42PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: >>> - Should it be an entire separate tree for soc drivers? Problem here >>> is that we lack a volunteer group (and imo it really should be a group >>> to avoid the single-maintainer troubles) to run that. >> >> Big +1. In addition to spreading out the workload, driver maintainers should >> still exercise ownership/stewardship. > > Big +1 on separate driver tree, or that we'll probably can't get it > because no volunteers? Neither :-) I was agreeing that we need a volunteer group (or "review economy") to make this work, as opposed to a single maintainer. Sean > For spreading out the workload, I don't expect > (or want) that this will cause more work for the existing drm-misc > group. Well, a few minutes more for the pull request summaries maybe, > but definitely no expectation that suddenly all of drm-misc helps out > with reviewing driver patches. That won't work. > >>> - Who's elligible? I think we could start small with a few volunteers >>> and their drivers, and then anyone who's willing. >> >> I think we could safely volunteer some drivers we haven't seen pull requests >> from in a while. > > Hm, I didn't think about drivers which aren't well-maintained. But if > there's a volunteer group we can do that ofc, but maybe not start out > with forcing it ... > -Daniel > -- > Daniel Vetter > Software Engineer, Intel Corporation > +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch -- Sean Paul, Software Engineer, Google / Chromium OS _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
