From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C4CAA04A4; Tue, 26 May 2020 12:52:17 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 242701D697; Tue, 26 May 2020 12:52:16 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mga03.intel.com (mga03.intel.com [134.134.136.65]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F7921D671; Tue, 26 May 2020 12:52:13 +0200 (CEST) IronPort-SDR: gX45LUTxRQo+3fi02mpmMhjNy1N9hS2X1oGR54/SH2HWtdzPEvfePwRjs8HkOT8BO8wdMa61uL /8c8GWJ9Hezw== X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga001.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.23]) by orsmga103.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 26 May 2020 03:52:12 -0700 IronPort-SDR: LvTtExXwBIcEasZaT+V7j7yjwxAHL1MXnDNsYMBpYph0kUUNaj4XXZjEqBAZtP4tgGkPGw2UFg YiRh40N9fZFw== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.73,437,1583222400"; d="scan'208";a="375664337" Received: from aburakov-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.209.43.93]) ([10.209.43.93]) by fmsmga001.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 26 May 2020 03:52:10 -0700 To: Thomas Monjalon , Jerin Jacob Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?Morten_Br=c3=b8rup?= , Maxime Coquelin , dpdk-dev , techboard@dpdk.org, "Jim St. Leger" References: <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35C60FEA@smartserver.smartshare.dk> <1664892.001bYUvlCK@thomas> From: "Burakov, Anatoly" Message-ID: Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 11:52:09 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1664892.001bYUvlCK@thomas> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [dpdk-techboard] Consider improving the DPDKcontribution processes X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On 26-May-20 11:33 AM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > >>> And therein lies the problem: Thomas (David, etc.) doesn't look at every >>> area of the code, he relies on us to do it. However, *he* is doing the >>> committing, and fixing up patches, etc. - so, i can't really say things >>> like, "hey, your indentation's wrong here, but Thomas will fix it on >>> apply" because that's me pushing more work onto Thomas, something i >>> don't think i have the moral right to do :) > > You can send a new version of the patch with the details fixed, > publicly readable, reviewable, and ready to be pushed. To be completely honest, that's something that's never occurred to me, and it sounds like a great idea. The downside is that taking over someone else's patch and resubmitting it may be taken the wrong way :) (and could also lead to confusion e.g. regarding versioning) > > >>> So, while Thomas is free to "fix on apply" at his own desire, i don't >>> think we have to make this a habit. > > Yes, it should be more or less an exception. > > Bottom line, it is important to be transparent and predictable, > while keeping some flexibility. > > -- Thanks, Anatoly