Re: Make clear, when contributions will be ignored

[Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>]

On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 02:16:27PM +0000, Дилян Палаузов wrote:
> Hello Segher,
> 
> my question was how do you propose to proceed, so that a no-reminders-for-patches-are-necessary-state is reached.
> 
> There is no relation with having infinite time or dealing with high-cost low-profit patches.
> 
> Previously I raised the quesion, whether automating the process for sending reminders, is a good idea.  This saves time
> of people to write reminders.

But that would be "optimising" exactly the wrong thing!  The choke point is
patch review.  So you should make it easier to review a patch, instead of
making it easier to send in more patches.  Your complaint is that many
patches are sent in but then not reviewed, or not reviewed for a long while,
after all.

Easy to review patches are of course first and foremost patches that do the
correct thing.  But also they need to clearly say what they fix (and how),
how the patch was tested, and they should often contain testcases for the
testsuite.  Easy to review patches usually use the same style and
presentation as all other easy to review patches.


Segher