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 800B8A04A4; Tue, 26 May 2020 16:01:16 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D7271D64B; Tue, 26 May 2020 16:01:15 +0200 (CEST) Received: from wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.24]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC1661D626; Tue, 26 May 2020 16:01:13 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AEC5A2C; Tue, 26 May 2020 10:01:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 26 May 2020 10:01:12 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=fm1; bh= PS5NYYFGwL2DY825I3yjhSX+SRvi0qLXdbfiAtjq5dM=; b=agCye2E0qhKlxPBe e2sr38273pQlQU21Qq+pfbbHBE/IJysvnzpF90jMcJ3ok3OpBgDzw8560YGxvY/I lqH3DWkMbYM9TrC7CZ92QZE0tTAuF2xmHkUhnWA2S5y8QwqsP8yimWjew5KYnGar t35VInU8ChpldTNPju0/cVo8NHIgL8G8D8CAb/DZJMKn6gCPhuM7QLQ/oEQCdla5 cR7EA3jejAwftN5Z1ggCrM3iMvv+7m1uSfUk34IEGwEJIou0vg+ir2QYS+GW8kQ1 C+PclcrukffzxebvxjSmwa9HywrnJBUgEQf54kzhahf+73UjQQ+Lx7Yg6L6sVK1G NwwoYQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=PS5NYYFGwL2DY825I3yjhSX+SRvi0qLXdbfiAtjq5 dM=; b=KM/ujk8MZp/2kq6WgepeY6eosPqCTsXQLKNFzEhCDoVzkt910EL8mfS/V S1dTyTGmOli1DcxKy62TmuPY7wX1aBEWO4gVW5BRGzJGgTm0Y5jhgaOw5HHGIu8H sGwuhM8kpUhFNo1yxlDfXv5tB1WAaJHNJHPdEF6nx9/DY1OPc5RxDFL5j6rtrvrM b6NrrY0Vymf/8Bjg1G1EDPpDZ2uo6CxLCOP3dyP4iN2pFl3jdbtYRQejtUL36tpr 3xfnRVLZtctmgOn9P0QAUremUUwaUAHzYVY0DATaZO7Br7dankjWhLBMYg4oBynJ j08ewNeeM8u17Ik7+wCjjmErUyUYQ== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduhedruddvvddgjedtucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecugg ftrfgrthhtvghrnhepudeggfdvfeduffdtfeeglefghfeukefgfffhueejtdetuedtjeeu ieeivdffgeehnecukfhppeejjedrudefgedrvddtfedrudekgeenucevlhhushhtvghruf hiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghl ohhnrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 9ABC330665CA; Tue, 26 May 2020 10:01:10 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "Burakov, Anatoly" Cc: Jerin Jacob , Morten =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Br=F8rup?= , Maxime Coquelin , dpdk-dev , techboard@dpdk.org, "Jim St. Leger" Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 16:01:09 +0200 Message-ID: <2821239.bYlTmC6xWU@thomas> In-Reply-To: <70bfdc14-7da8-1d1b-8c8b-f6c7eb00dd89@intel.com> References: <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35C60FEA@smartserver.smartshare.dk> <3833724.BKe9lYeCVe@thomas> <70bfdc14-7da8-1d1b-8c8b-f6c7eb00dd89@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" 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" 26/05/2020 15:57, Burakov, Anatoly: > On 26-May-20 1:45 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > 26/05/2020 12:52, Burakov, Anatoly: > >> 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) > > > > It happens to me to continuing work started by someone else. > > I keep original authorship, add my Signed-off-by, increment versioning, > > and insert it in the original thread with --in-reply-to. > > No, confusion not on your side, but on the side of the person whose > patch has been taken over :) I understood it correctly :) This is what I call collaboration. The best is to have good communication with its peers, then workload sharing becomes a detail, in my opinion.