On Sun, Dec 27, 2009 at 04:38:14PM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote: > On 12/27/2009 05:37 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >> I'd like to discuss two questions related to changes that >> are committed to the shared tree. >> 1. A lot of patches are committed without being posted >> to the list first, thus they go in without review. >> Why is this good? Can this be addressed? > > Personally, I try to send every patch to the mailing list. I think it's > a good idea to not only encourage additional review, but also to give > people a chance to provide input and participate in the process. > > At the same time, for some people who are either committing to a > subsystem that noone cares about or who are committing trivial things, I > understand that this seems like an artificial road block. > > If you see a patch get committed that you feel really should have gotten > additional review, please send a note about that specific patch to the > list. I think that's the best way to resolve this. In a lot of > circumstances, I assume the committer doesn't even realize that people > would care to comment so this sort of feedback can be helpful. > >> 2. When a change is committed to the tree, often no notification is sent >> to the author. >> Why is it a good idea to ask everyone to subscribe to qemu commits >> list as well? Can 'applied thanks' mail be sent to patch authors? > > > This is on my TODO list for this week. I think the best solution is to > get qemu-commits working and make sure that it also sends the note > directly to the author. > > There are ~35 patches committed each working day. That's a lot of > unnecessary traffic to qemu-devel IMHO.
It's only unnecessary if you don't consider that people might review patches. When I see "thanks applied" I know e.g. it's not waiting for review. Or if it is wrong I will comment with priority. > Regards, > > Anthony Liguori > >> Thanks, >>
