Hello Lee, [removed since we have been discussing the same back and forth]
On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Lee Jones <lee.jo...@linaro.org> wrote: >> >> No need for that, I already explained my point of view several times >> and you just think I'm wrong because I don't agree with you. So let's >> just agree on disagree ;-) > > I do think you're wrong. And you think I am wrong. My reasoning is > based on logic, common sense and words, and yours is based on, well, I > really don't know. ;) > My reasoning is based on two things basically: 1) Simplicity: it is easier to think in terms of developers (that post patches) and maintainers (that reviews / acks patches) instead of developers (that post patches), reviewers (that review patches) and maintainers (that collect patches and push them upstream). Individual developers posting patches should not even care what is the flow of a patch into mainline IMHO, just who should be in copy (which should be both the "own" of the file whatever is called and the subsystem maintainer). 2) Consistency: I think that the developer / maintainer split is what more people are familiar with than the developer / reviewer / maintainer split. I don't really have a strong opinion and I'm completely OK if all the people that don't keep a tree are renamed to Reviewer, Author, Whatever instead of Maintainer. The only thing that I ask is if this could be made consistently across all subsystems and have an agreement in consensus so developers knows what the semantics are regardless of what subsystems they need to contribute. > So yes, we'll have to agree to disagree or neither of us will get any > real work done today. > Agreed, I spent most of my morning on this thread ;) Best regards, Javier -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/