[Ksummit-discuss] [MAINTAINER SUMMIT] community management/subsystem governance

[Dmitry Torokhov]

On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 10:49 AM Greg KH <gregkh at linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 01:31:48PM -0400, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote:
> > So, what if we imagine that there's an imaginary web tool that does this:
> >
> > 1. Allows people to generate an account
> > 2. Verifies their email address
> > 3. Instructs people how to generate a patch or series of patches
> > 4. Gives a way to upload generated patches
> > 5. Runs checkpatch to make sure there are no errors
> > 6. Runs get_maintainer to find out where the patch(es) should be sent to
> > 7. (Does more imaginary magic, such as looking up message-id references)
> > 8. Mails it out
>
> That last step might be hard, you have to "mail it out" to look like it
> came from the original author, right?  Then all crud breaks out as you
> can't deliver an email from "sony.com" successfully.
>
> So you just provide them with a FOO1234 at k.o account or some such
> munging, to reflect back to their original email address, but what
> happens when I ask for a change?  Are you now a "man in the middle"
> forwarding emails around everywhere?  That could get messy quickly.
>
> It's that feedback loop where things break down.  I only accept on
> average, 1/3 of the patches sent to me, so retrys are a part of life, as
> is a conversation about what went wrong to deserve a retry.
>
> If you can incorporate that, great, we just invented gerrit!  :)
>
> Seriously, it would be good, but no gerrit please...

Seconded. I swear 75% of time I spend on patch reviews that I do for
Chrome OS is spent on clicking around UI, not actually commenting on
the issues I find.

Thanks.

-- 
Dmitry