Am 10.01.2012 14:33, schrieb Kevin Wolf: > Am 10.01.2012 14:22, schrieb Anthony Liguori: >> On 01/10/2012 06:58 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote: >>> Probably we need to attack the reviewing problem first: That I review >>> all block patches myself worked well as long as we were two or three >>> people in that area, but today it doesn't scale any more without >>> lowering the review standards - and I don't want to do that. Maybe we >>> should introduce something like "One Reviewed-by buys you two >>> Signed-off-bys for your own patches" ;-) >> >> I think one thing that helps is to make sure for maintainers to include >> Reviewed-bys in commits. The script I use (below) takes a mbox with the >> full >> thread and folks Reviewed-by/Tested-bys into the original patch spitting out >> an >> mbox with just the patches and tags. >> >> That way people are getting credit in git for doing reviews. It's a small >> incentive but every little bit helps. >> >> http://git.codemonkey.ws/cgit/mbox-filter.git/ > > I usually do that, although manually. > > Of the 487 patches I have committed, 71 have a Reviewed-by tag in the > commit message. Maybe I've missed to include it for some, but that's > about the ratio that feels realistic to me.
If you want an incentive, just put up a rule that every patch needs to be reviewed by at least the submaintainer and one person apart from the author (i.e., SoB + RB/AB + SoB). If a patch is lacking that additional review, the author will ping the list. Andreas
