Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 06:55:47AM +0300, Al Boldi wrote: > > Michal Piotrowski wrote: > > > On 18/06/07, Al Boldi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > > > > > On Sunday 17 June 2007, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > > > We of course do want to minimise the amount of overhead for each > > > > > > developer. I'm a strong believer in specialisation: rather than > > > > > > requiring that *every* developer/maintainer integrate new steps > > > > > > in their processes it would be better to allow them to proceed > > > > > > in a close-to-usual fashion and to provide for a specialist > > > > > > person (or team) to do the sorts of things which you're thinking > > > > > > about. > > > > > > > > > > Makes sense... however we need to educate each and every developer > > > > > about importance of the code review and proper recognition of > > > > > reviewers. > > > > > > > > That's as easy to manage as is currently done with rc-regressions. > > > > > > Are you a volunteer? > > > > Probably not, as this task requires a real PRO! > >... > > That's wrong. > > We are talking about _tracking_. > > I'm not sure whether it makes much sense, and it would cost an enormous > amount of time, but tracking patches should be possible without any > knowledge of the kernel.
If that's really true, which I can't imagine, then the proper way forward would probably involve a fully automated system. Thanks! -- Al - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
