From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 26 18:43:01 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7224616A419; Wed, 26 Dec 2007 18:43:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Received: from harmony.bsdimp.com (bsdimp.com [199.45.160.85]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A38C13C46B; Wed, 26 Dec 2007 18:43:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by harmony.bsdimp.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id lBQIbsJE033930; Wed, 26 Dec 2007 11:37:54 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2007 11:42:24 -0700 (MST) Message-Id: <20071226.114224.-432836428.imp@bsdimp.com> To: linimon@lonesome.com From: "M. Warner Losh" In-Reply-To: <20071226180415.GA27409@soaustin.net> References: <20071226.003547.-932932005.imp@bsdimp.com> <1198689316.1119.382.camel@Particle> <20071226180415.GA27409@soaustin.net> X-Mailer: Mew version 5.2 on Emacs 21.3 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: stable@freebsd.org, henrik@gulbra.net, freebsd-usb@freebsd.org, mi+kde@aldan.algebra.com, freebsd-bugbusters@freebsd.org Subject: Re: PR backlog X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2007 18:43:01 -0000 Mark and Henrik make a number of good points here. Rather than reply to the details, I'm going to make a couple of quick observations. As a project we're not leveraging the community sufficiently when it comes to contributions. The current system of patch review and submission is very hap-hazard. If you happen to get the attention of the right person at the right time, then it goes in. If not, patches can languish a long time in the PR system. The PR system is also the wrong tool for the job. While Mark touches on the cultural issues in play, they are exacerbated by the misapplication of a problem system to be a patch submission and tracking system. Maybe we need to adopt a practice from the Linux community. At least for arm kernel patches, there is a two step process: submit it to a mailing list for review and refinement, with the second step being submitting it into a queue. I'm not sure the details we need to be successful in the FreeBSD project. Many of the USB patches in the PR system I left alone because I didn't have the time and/or knowledge to evaluate them for inclusion, or I saw something obviously wrong in the patch. When I was trying to just get through the obviously trivial patches. Warner