On Wed, Dec 4, 2024 at 2:16 PM Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Em Wed, 4 Dec 2024 13:11:45 +0100 > Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@xxxxxxxxx> escreveu: > > > On 12/3/24 10:35, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > > > During the review of the media committer's profile, it was noticed > > > that the responsibility for timely review patches was not clear: > > > such review is expected that all developers listed at MAINTAINERS > > > with the "M:" tag (e.g. "maintainers" on its broad sense). > > > > > > This is orthogonal of being a media committer or not. Such duty > > > is implied at: > > > > > > Documentation/admin-guide/reporting-issues.rst > > > > > > and at the MAINTAINERS header, when it says that even when the > > > status is "odd fixes", the patches will flow in. > > > > > > So, let make it explicit at the maintainer-entry-profile that > > > maintainers need to do timely reviews. > > > > > > Also, while right now our focus is on granting committer rights to > > > maintainers, the media-committer model may evolve in the future to > > > accept other committers that don't have such duties. > > > > > > So, make it clear at the media-committer.rst that the duties > > > related to reviewing patches from others are for the drivers > > > they are maintainers as well. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@xxxxxxxxxx> Reviewed-by: Ricardo Ribalda <ribalda@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > Documentation/driver-api/media/maintainer-entry-profile.rst | 5 +++++ > > > Documentation/driver-api/media/media-committer.rst | 6 +++--- > > > 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/driver-api/media/maintainer-entry-profile.rst b/Documentation/driver-api/media/maintainer-entry-profile.rst > > > index fa28059f7b3f..87b71f89b1df 100644 > > > --- a/Documentation/driver-api/media/maintainer-entry-profile.rst > > > +++ b/Documentation/driver-api/media/maintainer-entry-profile.rst > > > @@ -173,6 +173,11 @@ b. Committers' workflow: patches are handled by media committers:: > > > On both workflows, all patches shall be properly reviewed at > > > linux-media@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (LMML) before being merged at media-committers.git. > > > > > > +Such patches will be reviewed timely by the maintainers and reviewers as > > > +listed in the MAINTAINERS file. The subsystem maintainers will follow one of > > > +the above workflows, e. g. they will either send a pull request or merge > > > +patches directly at the media-committers tree. > > > + > > > When patches are picked by patchwork and when merged at media-committers, > > > CI bots will check for errors and may provide e-mail feedback about > > > patch problems. When this happens, the patch submitter must fix them, or > > > diff --git a/Documentation/driver-api/media/media-committer.rst b/Documentation/driver-api/media/media-committer.rst > > > index 3d0987a8a93b..0bc038a0fdcc 100644 > > > --- a/Documentation/driver-api/media/media-committer.rst > > > +++ b/Documentation/driver-api/media/media-committer.rst > > > @@ -90,9 +90,9 @@ be a part of their maintenance tasks. > > > Due to that, to become a committer or a core committer, a consensus between > > > all subsystem maintainers is required, as they all need to trust a developer > > > well enough to be delegated the responsibility to maintain part of the code > > > -and to properly review patches from third parties, in a timely manner and > > > -keeping the status of the reviewed code at https://patchwork.linuxtv.org > > > -updated. > > > +and to properly review patches from third parties for the drivers that they > > > +maintain in a timely manner and keeping the status of the patches at > > > +https://patchwork.linuxtv.org updated. > > > > > > .. Note:: > > > > > > > Looks OK to me, but I thought this was supposed to be folded into the 3/5 and 4/5 patches? > > I'll fold it once you and Ricardo gives the same review/Sob as marked on 3/5 and 4/5. > > > Thanks, > Mauro > -- Ricardo Ribalda
