[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJZ5v0jJ6GFm4LFCR2V3qvD9rZrVw=pXyXSjSWPYtQudg-F3xg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 17:24:51 +0100
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>
Cc: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@...nel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"moderated list:SOUND - SOC LAYER / DYNAMIC AUDIO POWER MANAGEM..."
<alsa-devel@...a-project.org>,
amd-gfx list <amd-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
bridge@...ts.linux-foundation.org, ceph-devel@...r.kernel.org,
cluster-devel@...hat.com, coreteam@...filter.org,
devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, dm-devel@...hat.com,
drbd-dev@...ts.linbit.com,
dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
GR-everest-linux-l2@...vell.com, GR-Linux-NIC-Dev@...vell.com,
intel-gfx <intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org, keyrings@...r.kernel.org,
linux1394-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-afs@...ts.infradead.org,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
linux-arm-msm <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-atm-general@...ts.sourceforge.net,
linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-can@...r.kernel.org,
linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org,
Linux Crypto Mailing List <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-decnet-user@...ts.sourceforge.net,
Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:FRAMEBUFFER LAYER" <linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-geode@...ts.infradead.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
linux-hams@...r.kernel.org, linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org,
linux-i3c@...ts.infradead.org,
"open list:LIBATA SUBSYSTEM (Serial and Parallel ATA drivers)"
<linux-ide@...r.kernel.org>, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org,
linux-input <linux-input@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org,
"moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC..."
<linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org>,
Linux Media Mailing List <linux-media@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-mmc <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>, linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
Linux-Renesas <linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:TARGET SUBSYSTEM" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-sctp@...r.kernel.org, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com,
"open list:ULTRA-WIDEBAND (UWB) SUBSYSTEM:"
<linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>, linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org,
linux-wireless <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org,
nouveau <nouveau@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
op-tee@...ts.trustedfirmware.org, oss-drivers@...ronome.com,
patches@...nsource.cirrus.com, rds-devel@....oracle.com,
reiserfs-devel@...r.kernel.org, samba-technical@...ts.samba.org,
selinux@...r.kernel.org, target-devel@...r.kernel.org,
tipc-discussion@...ts.sourceforge.net,
usb-storage@...ts.one-eyed-alien.net,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
wcn36xx@...ts.infradead.org,
"maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" <x86@...nel.org>,
xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org, linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@...il.com>,
Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>, Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 000/141] Fix fall-through warnings for Clang
On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 4:58 PM James Bottomley
<James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2020-11-23 at 15:19 +0100, Miguel Ojeda wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 22, 2020 at 11:36 PM James Bottomley
> > <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com> wrote:
[cut]
> >
> > Maintainers routinely review 1-line trivial patches, not to mention
> > internal API changes, etc.
>
> We're also complaining about the inability to recruit maintainers:
>
> https://www.theregister.com/2020/06/30/hard_to_find_linux_maintainers_says_torvalds/
>
> And burn out:
>
> http://antirez.com/news/129
Right.
> The whole crux of your argument seems to be maintainers' time isn't
> important so we should accept all trivial patches ... I'm pushing back
> on that assumption in two places, firstly the valulessness of the time
> and secondly that all trivial patches are valuable.
>
> > If some company does not want to pay for that, that's fine, but they
> > don't get to be maintainers and claim `Supported`.
>
> What I'm actually trying to articulate is a way of measuring value of
> the patch vs cost ... it has nothing really to do with who foots the
> actual bill.
>
> One thesis I'm actually starting to formulate is that this continual
> devaluing of maintainers is why we have so much difficulty keeping and
> recruiting them.
Absolutely.
This is just one of the factors involved, but a significant one IMV.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists