linux-kernel - Re: outreachy/moving a driver out of staging

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:   Sun, 19 Mar 2017 00:37:47 -0700
From:   Michael Zoran <mzoran@...wfest.net>
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>
Cc:     devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, f.fainelli@...il.com,
        sbranden@...adcom.com, Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>,
        rjui@...adcom.com, lee@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com,
        linux-rpi-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        Scott Branden <scott.branden@...adcom.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: outreachy/moving a driver out of staging

On Thu, 2017-03-09 at 22:20 +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 01:56:49PM -0700, Stephen Warren wrote:
> > On 03/09/2017 01:51 PM, Scott Branden wrote:
> > > Hi Julia,
> > > 
> > > On 17-03-09 12:36 PM, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > > > Hello,
> > > > 
> > > > I discussed the issue of outreachy patches for bcm with Greg,
> > > > and we are
> > > > not convinced that not having the patches CCd to you is such a
> > > > good idea.
> > > > While we don't want to spam you with noise, some of the
> > > > applicants are
> > > > starting to make more significant changes that it could be
> > > > useful for you
> > > > to be aware of.
> > > > 
> > > > Could we try a compromise where you are not CCd on whitespace
> > > > patches,
> > > > but
> > > > you are CCd on patches that actually modify the code?
> > > 
> > > All I'm asking is you work through your outreachy patches
> > > internal first
> > > to get rid of the most basic mistakes and email traffic it is
> > > geerating.
> > >  Once that learning process is through then they can be sent out
> > > like
> > > any other patches to the kernel mailing lists and maintainers.
> > 
> > +1 from me too; I find these patches rather high volume and had to
> > add a
> > filter to keep them out of my primary inbox.
> 
> Hah!  That's the joy of being a maintainer of a driver in
> staging.  Even
> if you filter out outreachy, you are going to get a lot of "basic
> mistakes" and other type patches cc:ed to you.
> 
> I strongly suggest, that if you all don't like this type of stuff,
> either:
> 	- work to get the code out of staging as soon as possible (i.e.
> 	  send me coding style fixes for everything right now, and then
> 	  fix up the rest of the stuff.)
> 	- take yourself off the maintainer list for this code.
> 
> It's your choice, outreachy right now is a lot of patches, but again,
> it's not going to keep you from getting the "basic" stuff sent to you
> in ways that is totally wrong.
> 
> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h
> 

Hi Greg,

I just noticed this e-mail.  What exactly is the requirement to get a
driver or subsystem out of staging?

I can image a day when vc04_services or VideoCore gets moved out of
staging at some point. What exactly would it take to make something
like that happen?