DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
To: Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com>
Cc: "Chautru, Nicolas" <nicolas.chautru@intel.com>,
	"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] maintainers: New Reviewer entry type added to MAINTAINERS
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2020 17:41:07 +0200
Message-ID: <1985785.NsDeZ6iOcB@thomas> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1dbf4aaf-7a77-101d-24ea-6e3faec6165f@redhat.com>

02/10/2020 16:59, Tom Rix:
> 
> On 10/1/20 2:54 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > 01/10/2020 23:22, Chautru, Nicolas:
> >> From: trix@redhat.com <trix@redhat.com>
> >>> From: Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com>
> >>>
> >>> Copied from the Linux kernel MAINTAINERS file.
> >>> A Reviewer is designated person who wishes to review changes in areas of
> >>> interest.
> >>>
> >>> Added self as Reviewer for baseband.
> >>>
> >>> I am a Linux kernel Reviewer for the fpga n3000/vista creek which has
> >>> several bitstream based baseband devices.  So I want to help out here as
> >>> well.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com>
> >> Thanks for the help. 
> >> Note that they are a few other BBDEV patches in flight for 20.11 on top of the acc100 PMD that you may want to be aware of. 
> >> https://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/list/?series=&submitter=chautru&state=&q=&archive=&delegate=
> >>
> >> Acked-by: Nicolas Chautru <nicolas.chautru@intel.com>
> > [...]
> >>>  Baseband API - EXPERIMENTAL
> >>>  M: Nicolas Chautru <nicolas.chautru@intel.com>
> >>> +R: Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com>
> > I don't understand the need of differenciating maintainer and reviewer.
> > If you are trusted enough, why not just being co-maintainer?
> >
> I want to help out with the reviews, the reviewer type makes clear this level of commitment.
> 
> Maintainer is the next, higher level of commitment.
> 
> 
> Trust wise, this would allow the maintainer verify the reviewer does have the bandwidth to be responsive
> 
> and effective before committing to sharing responsibility.

Sorry I fail to understand.
My understanding is that you want to be Cc
but not committing for responsibility.
Would it be the same if you create a mail filter on your side?

This model is really not clear to me so I'm reluctant to add
such new category until I understand the benefit.



  reply	other threads:[~2020-10-02 15:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-10-01 14:30 trix
2020-10-01 21:22 ` Chautru, Nicolas
2020-10-01 21:54   ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-10-02 14:59     ` Tom Rix
2020-10-02 15:41       ` Thomas Monjalon [this message]
2020-10-02 16:35         ` Tom Rix

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1985785.NsDeZ6iOcB@thomas \
    --to=thomas@monjalon.net \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=nicolas.chautru@intel.com \
    --cc=trix@redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

DPDK patches and discussions

This inbox may be cloned and mirrored by anyone:

	git clone --mirror https://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/0 dev/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 dev dev/ https://inbox.dpdk.org/dev \
		dev@dpdk.org
	public-inbox-index dev

Example config snippet for mirrors.
Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://inbox.dpdk.org/inbox.dpdk.dev


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git