On Sat, Nov 23, 2019 at 3:50 PM Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Sat, 23 Nov 2019, Dan Williams wrote: > > > On Sat, Nov 23, 2019 at 3:27 PM Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > It looks like the main thing that would be needed would be to add the P: > > > entry with the path to our patch-acceptance.rst file into the MAINTAINERS > > > file, after Dan's patches are merged. > > > > > > Of course, we could also add more information about sparse cleanliness, > > > checkpatch warnings, etc., but we mostly try to follow the common kernel > > > guidelines there. > > > > Those could likely be automated to highlight warnings that a given > > subsystem treats as errors, but wherever possible my expectation is > > that the policy should be specified globally. > > > > > Is that summary accurate, or did I miss some additional steps? > > > > I'll go fixup and get the into patch submitted today then we can go from > > there. > > I guess I'm still looking for guidance along the lines of my earlier > question: what (if anything) would we need to change about the current > patch to have it work with the maintainer profile documentation (beyond > the "P:" entry in MAINTAINERS) ? Oh, sorry, I just reacted to Jon's comments. I took a look, and I think the content would just need to be organized into the proposed sections. The rules about what level of ratification a specification needs to receive before a patch will be received sounds like an extension to the Submit Checklist to me. So I'd say just format your first paragraph into the Overview section and the other 2 into Submit Checklist and call it good.
