On Sat, Mar 11, 2023 at 04:02:15PM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote: > Maybe I'm putting words in Greg's mouth, but I think we both would > ideally want to standardize around a single set of tools and scripts, > it's just the case that both of us started with different set of > problems we were trying to solve, and so our tooling evolved > independently. I'm not even sure this is strictly necessary. When I started jumping on 2.6 Greg told me "now you have to follow the new process involving a first preview release", and that completely changed the way I was dealing with fixes in 2.4. I then tried to adopt Greg's scripts, and when you do that you instantly figure that different people are at ease with different parts of the process, and over time I started to keep a collection of hacked scripts that would simplify certain parts of the process for me (stuff as stupid as creating directories having the kernel name in hard-coded paths in my work directory, or converting the "cherry-picked from" to the "upstream commit" format, etc). Your biggest difficulty probably is to find people willing and able to help, and while you should definitely show them your collection of tools to help them get started, these can also be frightening for newcomers or possibly not much useful to them if they come from a different background. Cheers, Willy
