netdev - Re: [RFC] docs: netdev: encourage reviewers

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]

Message-ID: <add6d13b-c788-427e-a92d-1d07589b86d0@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2023 14:21:49 -0700
From: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, edumazet@...gle.com,
 pabeni@...hat.com, jesse.brandeburg@...el.com, sd@...asysnail.net,
 horms@...ge.net.au
Subject: Re: [RFC] docs: netdev: encourage reviewers

On 10/6/23 12:10, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Oct 2023 11:57:15 -0700 Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>> :) If I can't get it past you there's no chance I'll get it past docs@
>>
>> Let me move some of the staff into general docs and add a reference.
>> The questions which came up were about use of tags and how maintainers
>> approach the reviews from less experienced devs, which I think is
>> subsystem-specific?
> 
> So moved most of the paragraphs to the common docs, what I kept in
> netdev is this:
> 
> 
> Reviewer guidance
> -----------------
> 
> Reviewing other people's patches on the list is highly encouraged,
> regardless of the level of expertise. For general guidance and
> helpful tips please see :ref:`development_advancedtopics_reviews`.
> 
> It's safe to assume that netdev maintainers know the community and the level
> of expertise of the reviewers. The reviewers should not be concerned about
> their comments impeding or derailing the patch flow.
> 
> Less experienced reviewers should avoid commenting exclusively on more
> trivial / subjective matters like code formatting and process aspects
> (e.g. missing subject tags).

Would rephrase the last paragraph and propose:

Less experienced reviewers are highly encouraged to do more in-depth 
review of submissions and not focus exclusively on trivial / subject 
matters like code formatting, tags etc.


-- 
Florian