From: Narcisa Ana Maria Vasile <hidden> Date: 2017-02-26 17:49:50
This was reported by checkpatch.pl
Signed-off-by: Narcisa Ana Maria Vasile <redacted>
---
drivers/staging/bcm2835-audio/bcm2835-pcm.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
From: Julia Lawall <hidden> Date: 2017-02-26 18:23:50
On Sun, 26 Feb 2017, Narcisa Ana Maria Vasile wrote:
This was reported by checkpatch.pl
Signed-off-by: Narcisa Ana Maria Vasile <redacted>
Acked-by: Julia Lawall <redacted>
Actually, the outreachy tutorial says not to send patches to mailing
lists, only to people (except in the case of IIO, where the maintainers
asked for patches to be sent to mailing lists as well). The
get_maintainer command to use is shown here:
https://kernelnewbies.org/FirstKernelPatch#submit_a_patch
From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> Date: 2017-02-26 18:35:32
On Sun, 2017-02-26 at 19:03 +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
On Sun, 26 Feb 2017, Narcisa Ana Maria Vasile wrote:
quoted
This was reported by checkpatch.pl
Signed-off-by: Narcisa Ana Maria Vasile <redacted>
Acked-by: Julia Lawall <redacted>
Actually, the outreachy tutorial says not to send patches to mailing
lists, only to people (except in the case of IIO, where the maintainers
asked for patches to be sent to mailing lists as well). The
get_maintainer command to use is shown here:
https://kernelnewbies.org/FirstKernelPatch#submit_a_patch
That doesn't make any sense to me.
Mailing lists _should_ be copied on patch submissions.
And the displayed output of that command-line does not match
the actual behavior.
The command-line is:
$ perl scripts/get_maintainer.pl --separator , --nokeywords --nogit --nogit-fallback --norolestats --nol -f drivers/staging/most/aim-sound/sound.c
And the output shown is:
Greg Kroah-Hartman [off-list ref],devel at driverdev.osuosl.org,linux-kernel at vger.kernel.org
That's not what's actually output by that command-line
as it would not show the mailing list.
$ perl scripts/get_maintainer.pl --separator , --nokeywords --nogit --nogit-fallback --norolestats --nol -f drivers/staging/most/aim-sound/sound.c
Greg Kroah-Hartman [off-list ref]
From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> Date: 2017-02-26 19:37:13
On Sun, 2017-02-26 at 19:59 +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
On Sun, 26 Feb 2017, Joe Perches wrote:
quoted
Mailing lists _should_ be copied on patch submissions.
The idea of outreachy is that it should be a place for people to get
started without too much criticism from the outside. Originally, only the
outreachy mailing list received patches. But staging maintainers were
confused to have their drivers receiving patches that they had not seen.
So we expanded it to maintainers.
That also doesn't make much sense as patches
should not be applied that have not reached
a mailing list for review.
As long as initial outreachy patches are not
applied and are just for internal review by
any outside person but the outreachy list and
are not be applied by maintainers, then perhaps
it's best if neither maintainers nor lists are
cc'd on the patches.
And the link you sent is for newbies, not for
outreachy.
The "don't cc lists" --nol use is inappropriate
there.
From: Julia Lawall <hidden> Date: 2017-02-26 20:46:09
On Sun, 26 Feb 2017, Joe Perches wrote:
On Sun, 2017-02-26 at 19:59 +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
quoted
On Sun, 26 Feb 2017, Joe Perches wrote:
quoted
Mailing lists _should_ be copied on patch submissions.
The idea of outreachy is that it should be a place for people to get
started without too much criticism from the outside. Originally, only the
outreachy mailing list received patches. But staging maintainers were
confused to have their drivers receiving patches that they had not seen.
So we expanded it to maintainers.
That also doesn't make much sense as patches
should not be applied that have not reached
a mailing list for review.
As long as initial outreachy patches are not
applied and are just for internal review by
any outside person but the outreachy list and
are not be applied by maintainers, then perhaps
it's best if neither maintainers nor lists are
cc'd on the patches.
The patches are applied by Greg. Greg suggested the policy of adding
maintainers but not including mailing lists. I'll let him consider
whether the policy should be changed.
And the link you sent is for newbies, not for
outreachy.
The link is part of the outreachy tutorial, which is hosted by the
kernelnewbies website.
julia
The "don't cc lists" --nol use is inappropriate
there.
From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> Date: 2017-02-26 21:57:46
On Sun, 2017-02-26 at 20:40 +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
On Sun, 26 Feb 2017, Joe Perches wrote:
quoted
On Sun, 2017-02-26 at 19:59 +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
quoted
On Sun, 26 Feb 2017, Joe Perches wrot
quoted
Mailing lists _should_ be copied on patch submissions.
The idea of outreachy is that it should be a place for people to get
started without too much criticism from the outside. Originally, only the
outreachy mailing list received patches. But staging maintainers were
confused to have their drivers receiving patches that they had not seen.
So we expanded it to maintainers.
That also doesn't make much sense as patches
should not be applied that have not reached
a mailing list for review.
As long as initial outreachy patches are not
applied and are just for internal review by
any outside person but the outreachy list and
are not be applied by maintainers, then perhaps
it's best if neither maintainers nor lists are
cc'd on the patches.
The patches are applied by Greg. Greg suggested the policy of adding
maintainers but not including mailing lists. I'll let him consider
whether the policy should be changed.
Well, I will comment on patches sent to the kernel list.
I'm not subscribed to outreachy and I don't want to be
subscribed to that list either.
From: Scott Branden <scott.branden@broadcom.com> Date: 2017-02-27 00:08:51
On 17-02-26 01:56 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
On Sun, 2017-02-26 at 20:40 +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
quoted
On Sun, 26 Feb 2017, Joe Perches wrote:
quoted
On Sun, 2017-02-26 at 19:59 +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
quoted
On Sun, 26 Feb 2017, Joe Perches wrot
quoted
Mailing lists _should_ be copied on patch submissions.
The idea of outreachy is that it should be a place for people to get
started without too much criticism from the outside. Originally, only the
outreachy mailing list received patches. But staging maintainers were
confused to have their drivers receiving patches that they had not seen.
So we expanded it to maintainers.
That also doesn't make much sense as patches
should not be applied that have not reached
a mailing list for review.
As long as initial outreachy patches are not
applied and are just for internal review by
any outside person but the outreachy list and
are not be applied by maintainers, then perhaps
it's best if neither maintainers nor lists are
cc'd on the patches.
The patches are applied by Greg. Greg suggested the policy of adding
maintainers but not including mailing lists. I'll let him consider
whether the policy should be changed.
Well, I will comment on patches sent to the kernel list.
I'm not subscribed to outreachy and I don't want to be
subscribed to that list either.
I would prefer this outreachy work uses their own mailing list and
reviews their patches first. Then once they have everything sorted out
they send out the patch series to the proper maintainers/mailing lists.
That way we're not spammed with all these emails of people as they are
learning how to format and send out proper patches.
Thanks,
Scott
From: Julia Lawall <hidden> Date: 2017-02-27 00:48:41
On Sun, 26 Feb 2017, Joe Perches wrote:
On Sun, 2017-02-26 at 19:03 +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
quoted
On Sun, 26 Feb 2017, Narcisa Ana Maria Vasile wrote:
quoted
This was reported by checkpatch.pl
Signed-off-by: Narcisa Ana Maria Vasile <redacted>
Acked-by: Julia Lawall <redacted>
Actually, the outreachy tutorial says not to send patches to mailing
lists, only to people (except in the case of IIO, where the maintainers
asked for patches to be sent to mailing lists as well). The
get_maintainer command to use is shown here:
https://kernelnewbies.org/FirstKernelPatch#submit_a_patch
That doesn't make any sense to me.
Mailing lists _should_ be copied on patch submissions.
The idea of outreachy is that it should be a place for people to get
started without too much criticism from the outside. Originally, only the
outreachy mailing list received patches. But staging maintainers were
confused to have their drivers receiving patches that they had not seen.
So we expanded it to maintainers.
And the displayed output of that command-line does not match
the actual behavior.
The command-line is:
$ perl scripts/get_maintainer.pl --separator , --nokeywords --nogit --nogit-fallback --norolestats --nol -f drivers/staging/most/aim-sound/sound.c
And the output shown is:
Greg Kroah-Hartman [off-list ref],devel at driverdev.osuosl.org,linux-kernel at vger.kernel.org
That's not what's actually output by that command-line
as it would not show the mailing list.
$ perl scripts/get_maintainer.pl --separator , --nokeywords --nogit --nogit-fallback --norolestats --nol -f drivers/staging/most/aim-sound/sound.c
Greg Kroah-Hartman [off-list ref]
Thanks for the report, I will fix the output.
julia
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "outreachy-kernel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to outreachy-kernel+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to outreachy-kernel at googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/outreachy-kernel/1488134072.9188.3.camel%40perches.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
From: Julia Lawall <hidden> Date: 2017-02-27 06:48:46
On Sun, 26 Feb 2017, Scott Branden wrote:
On 17-02-26 01:56 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
quoted
On Sun, 2017-02-26 at 20:40 +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
quoted
On Sun, 26 Feb 2017, Joe Perches wrote:
quoted
On Sun, 2017-02-26 at 19:59 +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
quoted
On Sun, 26 Feb 2017, Joe Perches wrot
quoted
Mailing lists _should_ be copied on patch submissions.
The idea of outreachy is that it should be a place for people to get
started without too much criticism from the outside. Originally, only
the
outreachy mailing list received patches. But staging maintainers were
confused to have their drivers receiving patches that they had not
seen.
So we expanded it to maintainers.
That also doesn't make much sense as patches
should not be applied that have not reached
a mailing list for review.
As long as initial outreachy patches are not
applied and are just for internal review by
any outside person but the outreachy list and
are not be applied by maintainers, then perhaps
it's best if neither maintainers nor lists are
cc'd on the patches.
The patches are applied by Greg. Greg suggested the policy of adding
maintainers but not including mailing lists. I'll let him consider
whether the policy should be changed.
Well, I will comment on patches sent to the kernel list.
I'm not subscribed to outreachy and I don't want to be
subscribed to that list either.
I would prefer this outreachy work uses their own mailing list and reviews
their patches first. Then once they have everything sorted out they send out
the patch series to the proper maintainers/mailing lists. That way we're not
spammed with all these emails of people as they are learning how to format and
send out proper patches.
If you consider that you are getting too much outreachy mail at the
moment, just let me know what subsystem you want me to add an exception
for.
thanks,
julia
From: Dan Carpenter <hidden> Date: 2017-02-27 14:47:55
On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 07:25:30AM +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
On Sun, 26 Feb 2017, Scott Branden wrote:
quoted
On 17-02-26 01:56 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
quoted
On Sun, 2017-02-26 at 20:40 +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
quoted
On Sun, 26 Feb 2017, Joe Perches wrote:
quoted
On Sun, 2017-02-26 at 19:59 +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
quoted
On Sun, 26 Feb 2017, Joe Perches wrot
quoted
Mailing lists _should_ be copied on patch submissions.
The idea of outreachy is that it should be a place for people to get
started without too much criticism from the outside. Originally, only
the
outreachy mailing list received patches. But staging maintainers were
confused to have their drivers receiving patches that they had not
seen.
So we expanded it to maintainers.
It was mostly me being annoyed because outreachy reviews are not that
good frankly. We just were just looking at outreachy code from 2013
where they "fixed" sparse endian notations by removing the endian
conversions. It was so obviously wrong just from reading the changelog
before you even got to the patch itself...
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
That also doesn't make much sense as patches
should not be applied that have not reached
a mailing list for review.
As long as initial outreachy patches are not
applied and are just for internal review by
any outside person but the outreachy list and
are not be applied by maintainers, then perhaps
it's best if neither maintainers nor lists are
cc'd on the patches.
The patches are applied by Greg. Greg suggested the policy of adding
maintainers but not including mailing lists. I'll let him consider
whether the policy should be changed.
Well, I will comment on patches sent to the kernel list.
I'm not subscribed to outreachy and I don't want to be
subscribed to that list either.
I would prefer this outreachy work uses their own mailing list and reviews
their patches first. Then once they have everything sorted out they send out
the patch series to the proper maintainers/mailing lists. That way we're not
spammed with all these emails of people as they are learning how to format and
send out proper patches.
Outreachy emails are not really worse than normal staging patches so
I don't mind the spam. But it would be good if driver-devel were always
CC'd on the final patch.
I know Greg feels differently.
regards,
dan carpenter
From: Scott Branden <scott.branden@broadcom.com> Date: 2017-02-27 20:45:15
Hi Julia,
On 17-02-26 10:25 PM, Julia Lawall wrote:
On Sun, 26 Feb 2017, Scott Branden wrote:
quoted
On 17-02-26 01:56 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
quoted
On Sun, 2017-02-26 at 20:40 +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
quoted
On Sun, 26 Feb 2017, Joe Perches wrote:
quoted
On Sun, 2017-02-26 at 19:59 +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
quoted
On Sun, 26 Feb 2017, Joe Perches wrot
quoted
Mailing lists _should_ be copied on patch submissions.
The idea of outreachy is that it should be a place for people to get
started without too much criticism from the outside. Originally, only
the
outreachy mailing list received patches. But staging maintainers were
confused to have their drivers receiving patches that they had not
seen.
So we expanded it to maintainers.
That also doesn't make much sense as patches
should not be applied that have not reached
a mailing list for review.
As long as initial outreachy patches are not
applied and are just for internal review by
any outside person but the outreachy list and
are not be applied by maintainers, then perhaps
it's best if neither maintainers nor lists are
cc'd on the patches.
The patches are applied by Greg. Greg suggested the policy of adding
maintainers but not including mailing lists. I'll let him consider
whether the policy should be changed.
Well, I will comment on patches sent to the kernel list.
I'm not subscribed to outreachy and I don't want to be
subscribed to that list either.
I would prefer this outreachy work uses their own mailing list and reviews
their patches first. Then once they have everything sorted out they send out
the patch series to the proper maintainers/mailing lists. That way we're not
spammed with all these emails of people as they are learning how to format and
send out proper patches.
If you consider that you are getting too much outreachy mail at the
moment, just let me know what subsystem you want me to add an exception
for.
The emails seem to mostly be coming with bcm2835-audio.
From: Michael Zoran <hidden> Date: 2017-02-27 22:04:48
On Mon, 2017-02-27 at 12:35 -0800, Scott Branden wrote:
quoted
Hi Julia,
On 17-02-26 10:25 PM, Julia Lawall wrote:
quoted
If you consider that you are getting too much outreachy mail at the
moment, just let me know what subsystem you want me to add an
exception
for.
The emails seem to mostly be coming with bcm2835-audio.
quoted
thanks,
julia
Thanks,
? Scott
I submitted the driver to stagging, so I feel a bit responsible for
this.
I personally don't mind e-mails like this since people have to get
started somehow, and e-mail is rather easy to ignore or delete...
Perhaps it would make sense to either update the maintainer list for
this driver or move the driver somewhere else in staging? I was
looking at the maintainer list for bcm2835, and it already marks
vc04_services as part of the bcm2835 files. Perhaps another mark
should be added or the driver moved under vc04_services?