From patchwork Wed Sep 11 15:48:42 2019 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Dan Williams X-Patchwork-Id: 11141429 Return-Path: Received: from mail.kernel.org (pdx-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [172.30.200.123]) by pdx-korg-patchwork-2.web.codeaurora.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8328B1395 for ; Wed, 11 Sep 2019 16:03:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ml01.01.org (ml01.01.org [198.145.21.10]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6A69F208E4 for ; Wed, 11 Sep 2019 16:03:02 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 6A69F208E4 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-nvdimm-bounces@lists.01.org Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A778202BDC8C; Wed, 11 Sep 2019 09:03:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org Delivered-To: linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org Received-SPF: Pass (sender SPF authorized) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=134.134.136.20; helo=mga02.intel.com; envelope-from=dan.j.williams@intel.com; receiver=linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org Received: from mga02.intel.com (mga02.intel.com [134.134.136.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BB61421962301 for ; Wed, 11 Sep 2019 09:03:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga001.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.18]) by orsmga101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 11 Sep 2019 09:03:00 -0700 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.64,492,1559545200"; d="scan'208";a="268788464" Received: from dwillia2-desk3.jf.intel.com (HELO dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com) ([10.54.39.16]) by orsmga001-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 11 Sep 2019 09:03:00 -0700 Subject: [PATCH v2 0/3] Maintainer Entry Profiles From: Dan Williams To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2019 08:48:42 -0700 Message-ID: <156821692280.2951081.18036584954940423225.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com> User-Agent: StGit/0.18-2-gc94f MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Linux-nvdimm developer list." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Alexandre Belloni , ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org, Jonathan Corbet , Daniel Vetter , linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org, Greg Kroah-Hartman , Olof Johansson , Steve French , Joe Perches , Thomas Gleixner , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Linus Torvalds , Dmitry Vyukov , "Tobin C. Harding" Errors-To: linux-nvdimm-bounces@lists.01.org Sender: "Linux-nvdimm" Changes since v1 [1]: - Simplify the profile to a hopefully non-controversial set of attributes that address the most common sources of contributor confusion, or maintainer frustration. - Rename "Subsystem Profile" to "Maintainer Entry Profile". Not every entry in MAINTAINERS represents a full subsystem. There may be driver local considerations to communicate to a submitter in addition to wider subsystem guidelines. - Delete the old P: tag in MAINTAINERS rather than convert to a new E: tag (Joe Perches). [1]: http://lore.kernel.org/r/154225759358.2499188.15268218778137905050.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com --- At last years Plumbers Conference I proposed the Maintainer Entry Profile as a document that a maintainer can provide to set contributor expectations and provide fodder for a discussion between maintainers about the merits of different maintainer policies. For those that did not attend, the goal of the Maintainer Entry Profile, and the Maintainer Handbook more generally, is to provide a desk reference for maintainers both new and experienced. The session introduction was: The first rule of kernel maintenance is that there are no hard and fast rules. That state of affairs is both a blessing and a curse. It has served the community well to be adaptable to the different people and different problem spaces that inhabit the kernel community. However, that variability also leads to inconsistent experiences for contributors, little to no guidance for new contributors, and unnecessary stress on current maintainers. There are quite a few of people who have been around long enough to make enough mistakes that they have gained some hard earned proficiency. However if the kernel community expects to keep growing it needs to be able both scale the maintainers it has and ramp new ones without necessarily let them make a decades worth of mistakes to learn the ropes. To be clear, the proposed document does not impose or suggest new rules. Instead it provides an outlet to document the unwritten rules and policies in effect for each subsystem, and that each subsystem might decide differently for whatever reason. --- Dan Williams (3): MAINTAINERS: Reclaim the P: tag for Maintainer Entry Profile Maintainer Handbook: Maintainer Entry Profile libnvdimm, MAINTAINERS: Maintainer Entry Profile Documentation/maintainer/index.rst | 1 .../maintainer/maintainer-entry-profile.rst | 99 ++++++++++++++++++++ Documentation/nvdimm/maintainer-entry-profile.rst | 64 +++++++++++++ MAINTAINERS | 20 ++-- 4 files changed, 175 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) create mode 100644 Documentation/maintainer/maintainer-entry-profile.rst create mode 100644 Documentation/nvdimm/maintainer-entry-profile.rst