Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 18 Dec 2014 19:05:28 +0000 | From | Mark Brown <> | Subject | Re: [RFC 0/4] Stop maintainer abuse |
| |
On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 10:52:27AM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 12:14:24AM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> > And what's wrong for one maintainer will be right for another, and > > vice versa.
> Ok, so what's wrong with "should not expect any feedback during the > merge window"?
AFAICT the original complaint wasn't about people expecting feedback during the merge window, it was about people sending things at all which is a different thing.
> And besides, when one starts working with maintainers, one soon learns > when they are the busiest and can refrain from sending patchsets then.
Or if that even makes a difference of course.
> I see your point that different maintainers can be busy at different > times but you also have to acknowledge the desire of some maintainers > not to get new patchsets during the merge window. So we have to have a > way to communicate that to submitters so that no explosions happen.
I think it's important to be clear what we're talking about when we advise people; the advice about allowing for people being busy or otherwise unavailable applies pretty much all the time - one of the most common process problems I see is people expecting quick turnaround times, it'd be really good to set expecations there and it seems hard to go wrong.
Not posting at all is a bit different, though, and is much more maintainer specific - personally I'm in the opposite camp to Thomas and would rather people just sent things whenever so I can get round to them as I have time rather than getting everyone sending things at once. [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |