[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] [RESEND2] Qemu unmaintained?

From: Avi Kivity
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] [RESEND2] Qemu unmaintained?
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 19:35:43 +0300
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv: Gecko/20090814 Fedora/3.0-2.6.b3.fc11 Thunderbird/3.0b3

On 09/10/2009 07:22 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
You certainly shouldn't ack patches you don't commit!

But most spend time in staging.

What's the percentage of patches that make it to master? For me it's >90%. If it's too low we nned to fix that.

Acking patches that go to master, that's perfectly fine to do.

I think that's too late, especially as it often takes a week for master to be pushed. To a submitter, an ack means "no further action is required from you at this time" and it's good to provide it as early as possible.

The qemu-commits list does that and should CC the author directly so this should be happening.

It's too late, and doesn't help others who have an interest in the patch.

It's acking things that go into staging that I think would be difficult and not necessarily productive.

That is what I do and it doesn't seem to be troublesome. If I drop a patch from a queue I explicitly unack it.

This is goofy and is caused by improper patch submission. But when people quote email threads in a commit message, I don't remove them. It don't see it as a problem.

From long experience, most commit messages need to be edited. People rarely write commit messages that can be understood a year later, and they don't know how 'git am' works.

I don't like editing patches. I think it's unfair to the submitter to change their patch underneath of them. I'd suggest providing feedback on the list to people who write bad commit messages and ask them to write better ones. I try to limit the changes I make to resolving merge conflicts.

Editing the commit log is not changing the patch. I doubt you'll be able to get better commit messages - submitters have more immediate perspectives than maintainers (should have). I always try to make the log make sense a year from now (the code may change, but the commit log won't).

Unfairly picking on Mark (who usually writes truly excellent changelogs, but this one is such a gem):

Subject: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 01/19] Suppress more more kraxelism

Let's kick off this series with some of the more critical fixes.

Signed-off-by: Mark McLoughlin<address@hidden>

What would you be thinking hunting the commit log for some change and coming up with this?

(Mark, apologies for picking on you, it's truly unfair of me, but I can't help it)

I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this
signature is too narrow to contain.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]