On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 12:55 PM, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 12:31 PM, Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> So far as I've been told, it takes many many months for Luc to get a >> response on things he sends upstream, then gets some stylistic >> feedback, fixes it, resubmits, and then has to wait another couple of >> months. For this reason, people get fed up and are then inclined to >> diverge. This is a bummer, as it'd be preferable to have quick review >> cycles and thus continuous merging. > > Oh, I agree. I think sparse maintenance does need to be more responsive. > > From personal experience, I can say that can be pretty hard to start > trusting others enough to just apply patches and take pull requests. > But it's important. > > The maintainer does need to be a source of quality control, but at the > same time, it does very much require "trust others to just do the > right thing" too. The quality control may be about finding a quality > person, not about each patch. > > Otherwise maintenance ends up being a huge bottleneck. Thanks for the very insightful feed back. That is super helpful. > So I do think Chris should take patches from Luc in particular more > aggressively - and preferably just pull his tree. Or even have shared > maintenance of the whole tree. > > Because Luc has definitely been around long enough that we know he > fixes any issues he has introduced. You are right. Let me start merging Luc's master tree. There will be conflicts, I will post my result on a different thread. Chris -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sparse" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
