linux-kernel - Re: Maintainer abuse

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 13 Dec 2014 18:46:52 +0100
From:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:	One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: Maintainer abuse

On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 01:52:31PM +0000, One Thousand Gnomes wrote:

...

> It could then be integrated into git (if only so we can have a "git lost"
> command to block annoying sources)

All sounds nice and good but I'd be fine with people adhering to the
one-week feedback gather rule and not sending patchsets during the merge
window, for starters. I think those two will get us pretty far.

> 2. Is X86 moving at a rate which needs some additional maintainers to
> "maintain" the pending queue during merge windows and the like, and get
> stuff into order for the maintainers proper ?

Yep, no patches during the merge window should be a good start.

The rest of the time x86 actually scales pretty fine IMO.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/