[Ksummit-discuss] [TOPIC] Encouraging more reviewers

Daniel Vetter daniel.vetter at ffwll.ch
Wed May 28 22:48:31 UTC 2014


On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 6:39 PM, Mark Brown <broonie at kernel.org> wrote:
> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 04:39:15PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>> My approach has been to insist on an in-patch revision log which gets
>> included in the commit. And that for any changes and bugs spotted the
>> reviewer/commenter must be acknowleged. See e.g.
>> d978ef14456a38034f6c0e for a very nice example of that. But that's
>> also a good example for no tag to acknowledge all the work that went
>> into this review/patch, since I've done the final review myself and
>> only put my sob onto the patch.
>
> This does mean that the final changelogs that get included in the kernel
> get very large and noisy and is relying on the submitters doing a good
> job paying attention to review comments in the first place, recording
> exactly what changed and so on.  They are sometimes useful but normally
> I'm finding very little value in the changelogs in the first place,
> generally it doesn't really matter what the problems were in any
> previous versions.

Thus far it didn't annoy me - it's at the bottom with the sob section.
And occasionally I've found it useful to follow some of the steps laid
out in there to understand why a patch looks what it looks like. I
know that a lot of other maintainers want the patch revision log below
the scissors.

And it also gives me a really good tool to scold patch authors if they
don't follow up on all review comments, which is the other useful
aspect. Including it in the commit makes it look a bit more valued imo
and hopefully makes sure people take this all serious.
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch


More information about the Ksummit-discuss mailing list