-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 02/18/2013 11:36 AM, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Wolfgang,
On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 3:35 AM, Wolfgang Denk wd@denx.de wrote:
Dear Tom,
In message 51216721.1010603@ti.com you wrote:
There's another thread I don't have yet (and I don't have this one in gmail yet even). But, I am OK with custodians using their repos, but not the master branch, for unrelated but otherwise good patches. I'm also fine with patchwork bundles. I suppose we could use the staging repository for these changes instead.
What I mostly object about there is that these patches would go into mainline basicly unreviewed, as patch submission and pull request is all done from a single person, with no other feedback on the patches at all. And this affects a lot of common code...
Fair enough. I suspect a number of people scan the code, but few feel invested enough to formally Ack it. Also, providing a full review of such a series can take quite a bit of time. Against that, I think it is better to get code in and tested than have it sit around until just before the next release.
[snip]
So there are changes all over the place, including a growth of the memory footprint. I think this needs at least minimal review.
We need more reviewers I think.
This is where I'm trying to find a good balance right now. If we just wait for reviewed-by lines to fly by, things will sit forever. Partly because enough folks don't feel like they "own" things enough to risk saying they reviewed something that turns out later to have a bug. And partly there's just not enough folks reading patches. I do try and give things some sort of read-over when it's the person posting who is doing the merging, especially for common rather than "their area" code.
- -- Tom