[Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] Recruitment (Reviewers, Testers, Maintainers, Hobbyists)

[David Woodhouse]

On Thu, 2015-07-09 at 17:24 -0400, Julia Lawall wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Jul 2015, josh at joshtriplett.org wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, Jul 09, 2015 at 10:38:30PM +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jul 09, 2015 at 01:11:27PM -0700, josh at joshtriplett.org w
> > > rote:
> > > > Bonus if this is also wired into the 0day bot, so that you also 
> > > > find out
> > > > if you introduce a new warning or error.
> > > 
> > > No reason to make bots do stupid work, if we really wanted to 
> > > consider
> > > this a bit more seriously the pipeline could be:
> > > 
> > >   mailing-list | coccinelle coccicheck| smatch | sparse | 0-day
> > > -bot
> > 
> > That would effectively make the bot duplicate part of 0-day.  Seems
> > easier to have some way to tell 0-day "if you see obvious 
> > procedural
> > issues, don't bother with full-scale testing, just reject".
> 
> Not sure to understand.  Isn't it better to have the most feedback
> possible?

If we're talking about encouraging new contributors, then probably not.

You don't necessarily want a lot of negative feedback from different
places, all at once.

-- 
David Woodhouse                            Open Source Technology Centre
David.Woodhouse at intel.com                              Intel Corporation