diff mbox series

[v4,5/5] docs: media: profile: make it clearer about maintainership duties

Message ID f74d32eba4c1799fe7fd407a3889a3de91fb09f2.1733218348.git.mchehab+huawei@kernel.org
State New
Headers show
Series None | expand

Commit Message

Mauro Carvalho Chehab Dec. 3, 2024, 9:35 a.m. UTC
During the review of the media committer's profile, it was noticed
that the responsibility for timely review patches was not clear:
such review is expected that all developers listed at MAINTAINERS
with the "M:" tag (e.g. "maintainers" on its broad sense).

This is orthogonal of being a media committer or not. Such duty
is implied at:

	Documentation/admin-guide/reporting-issues.rst

and at the MAINTAINERS header, when it says that even when the
status is "odd fixes", the patches will flow in.

So, let make it explicit at the maintainer-entry-profile that
maintainers need to do timely reviews.

Also, while right now our focus is on granting committer rights to
maintainers, the media-committer model may evolve in the future to
accept other committers that don't have such duties.

So, make it clear at the media-committer.rst that the duties
related to reviewing patches from others are for the drivers
they are maintainers as well.

Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@kernel.org>
---
 Documentation/driver-api/media/maintainer-entry-profile.rst | 5 +++++
 Documentation/driver-api/media/media-committer.rst          | 6 +++---
 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

Comments

Hans Verkuil Dec. 4, 2024, 12:11 p.m. UTC | #1
On 12/3/24 10:35, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> During the review of the media committer's profile, it was noticed
> that the responsibility for timely review patches was not clear:
> such review is expected that all developers listed at MAINTAINERS
> with the "M:" tag (e.g. "maintainers" on its broad sense).
> 
> This is orthogonal of being a media committer or not. Such duty
> is implied at:
> 
> 	Documentation/admin-guide/reporting-issues.rst
> 
> and at the MAINTAINERS header, when it says that even when the
> status is "odd fixes", the patches will flow in.
> 
> So, let make it explicit at the maintainer-entry-profile that
> maintainers need to do timely reviews.
> 
> Also, while right now our focus is on granting committer rights to
> maintainers, the media-committer model may evolve in the future to
> accept other committers that don't have such duties.
> 
> So, make it clear at the media-committer.rst that the duties
> related to reviewing patches from others are for the drivers
> they are maintainers as well.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@kernel.org>
> ---
>  Documentation/driver-api/media/maintainer-entry-profile.rst | 5 +++++
>  Documentation/driver-api/media/media-committer.rst          | 6 +++---
>  2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/driver-api/media/maintainer-entry-profile.rst b/Documentation/driver-api/media/maintainer-entry-profile.rst
> index fa28059f7b3f..87b71f89b1df 100644
> --- a/Documentation/driver-api/media/maintainer-entry-profile.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/driver-api/media/maintainer-entry-profile.rst
> @@ -173,6 +173,11 @@ b. Committers' workflow: patches are handled by media committers::
>  On both workflows, all patches shall be properly reviewed at
>  linux-media@vger.kernel.org (LMML) before being merged at media-committers.git.
>  
> +Such patches will be reviewed timely by the maintainers and reviewers as
> +listed in the MAINTAINERS file. The subsystem maintainers will follow one of
> +the above workflows, e. g. they will either send a pull request or merge
> +patches directly at the media-committers tree.
> +
>  When patches are picked by patchwork and when merged at media-committers,
>  CI bots will check for errors and may provide e-mail feedback about
>  patch problems. When this happens, the patch submitter must fix them, or
> diff --git a/Documentation/driver-api/media/media-committer.rst b/Documentation/driver-api/media/media-committer.rst
> index 3d0987a8a93b..0bc038a0fdcc 100644
> --- a/Documentation/driver-api/media/media-committer.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/driver-api/media/media-committer.rst
> @@ -90,9 +90,9 @@ be a part of their maintenance tasks.
>  Due to that, to become a committer or a core committer, a consensus between
>  all subsystem maintainers is required, as they all need to trust a developer
>  well enough to be delegated the responsibility to maintain part of the code
> -and to properly review patches from third parties, in a timely manner and
> -keeping the status of the reviewed code at https://patchwork.linuxtv.org
> -updated.
> +and to properly review patches from third parties for the drivers that they
> +maintain in a timely manner and keeping the status of the patches at
> +https://patchwork.linuxtv.org updated.
>  
>  .. Note::
>  

Looks OK to me, but I thought this was supposed to be folded into the 3/5 and 4/5 patches?

Regards,

	Hans
Mauro Carvalho Chehab Dec. 4, 2024, 12:51 p.m. UTC | #2
Em Wed, 4 Dec 2024 13:11:45 +0100
Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@xs4all.nl> escreveu:

> On 12/3/24 10:35, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> > During the review of the media committer's profile, it was noticed
> > that the responsibility for timely review patches was not clear:
> > such review is expected that all developers listed at MAINTAINERS
> > with the "M:" tag (e.g. "maintainers" on its broad sense).
> > 
> > This is orthogonal of being a media committer or not. Such duty
> > is implied at:
> > 
> > 	Documentation/admin-guide/reporting-issues.rst
> > 
> > and at the MAINTAINERS header, when it says that even when the
> > status is "odd fixes", the patches will flow in.
> > 
> > So, let make it explicit at the maintainer-entry-profile that
> > maintainers need to do timely reviews.
> > 
> > Also, while right now our focus is on granting committer rights to
> > maintainers, the media-committer model may evolve in the future to
> > accept other committers that don't have such duties.
> > 
> > So, make it clear at the media-committer.rst that the duties
> > related to reviewing patches from others are for the drivers
> > they are maintainers as well.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@kernel.org>
> > ---
> >  Documentation/driver-api/media/maintainer-entry-profile.rst | 5 +++++
> >  Documentation/driver-api/media/media-committer.rst          | 6 +++---
> >  2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/Documentation/driver-api/media/maintainer-entry-profile.rst b/Documentation/driver-api/media/maintainer-entry-profile.rst
> > index fa28059f7b3f..87b71f89b1df 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/driver-api/media/maintainer-entry-profile.rst
> > +++ b/Documentation/driver-api/media/maintainer-entry-profile.rst
> > @@ -173,6 +173,11 @@ b. Committers' workflow: patches are handled by media committers::
> >  On both workflows, all patches shall be properly reviewed at
> >  linux-media@vger.kernel.org (LMML) before being merged at media-committers.git.
> >  
> > +Such patches will be reviewed timely by the maintainers and reviewers as
> > +listed in the MAINTAINERS file. The subsystem maintainers will follow one of
> > +the above workflows, e. g. they will either send a pull request or merge
> > +patches directly at the media-committers tree.
> > +
> >  When patches are picked by patchwork and when merged at media-committers,
> >  CI bots will check for errors and may provide e-mail feedback about
> >  patch problems. When this happens, the patch submitter must fix them, or
> > diff --git a/Documentation/driver-api/media/media-committer.rst b/Documentation/driver-api/media/media-committer.rst
> > index 3d0987a8a93b..0bc038a0fdcc 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/driver-api/media/media-committer.rst
> > +++ b/Documentation/driver-api/media/media-committer.rst
> > @@ -90,9 +90,9 @@ be a part of their maintenance tasks.
> >  Due to that, to become a committer or a core committer, a consensus between
> >  all subsystem maintainers is required, as they all need to trust a developer
> >  well enough to be delegated the responsibility to maintain part of the code
> > -and to properly review patches from third parties, in a timely manner and
> > -keeping the status of the reviewed code at https://patchwork.linuxtv.org
> > -updated.
> > +and to properly review patches from third parties for the drivers that they
> > +maintain in a timely manner and keeping the status of the patches at
> > +https://patchwork.linuxtv.org updated.
> >  
> >  .. Note::
> >    
> 
> Looks OK to me, but I thought this was supposed to be folded into the 3/5 and 4/5 patches?

I'll fold it once you and Ricardo gives the same review/Sob as marked on 3/5 and 4/5.


Thanks,
Mauro
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/Documentation/driver-api/media/maintainer-entry-profile.rst b/Documentation/driver-api/media/maintainer-entry-profile.rst
index fa28059f7b3f..87b71f89b1df 100644
--- a/Documentation/driver-api/media/maintainer-entry-profile.rst
+++ b/Documentation/driver-api/media/maintainer-entry-profile.rst
@@ -173,6 +173,11 @@  b. Committers' workflow: patches are handled by media committers::
 On both workflows, all patches shall be properly reviewed at
 linux-media@vger.kernel.org (LMML) before being merged at media-committers.git.
 
+Such patches will be reviewed timely by the maintainers and reviewers as
+listed in the MAINTAINERS file. The subsystem maintainers will follow one of
+the above workflows, e. g. they will either send a pull request or merge
+patches directly at the media-committers tree.
+
 When patches are picked by patchwork and when merged at media-committers,
 CI bots will check for errors and may provide e-mail feedback about
 patch problems. When this happens, the patch submitter must fix them, or
diff --git a/Documentation/driver-api/media/media-committer.rst b/Documentation/driver-api/media/media-committer.rst
index 3d0987a8a93b..0bc038a0fdcc 100644
--- a/Documentation/driver-api/media/media-committer.rst
+++ b/Documentation/driver-api/media/media-committer.rst
@@ -90,9 +90,9 @@  be a part of their maintenance tasks.
 Due to that, to become a committer or a core committer, a consensus between
 all subsystem maintainers is required, as they all need to trust a developer
 well enough to be delegated the responsibility to maintain part of the code
-and to properly review patches from third parties, in a timely manner and
-keeping the status of the reviewed code at https://patchwork.linuxtv.org
-updated.
+and to properly review patches from third parties for the drivers that they
+maintain in a timely manner and keeping the status of the patches at
+https://patchwork.linuxtv.org updated.
 
 .. Note::