On 9/11/19 4:48 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
At last years Plumbers Conference I proposed the Maintainer Entry
Profile as a document that a maintainer can provide to set contributor
expectations and provide fodder for a discussion between maintainers
about the merits of different maintainer policies.
For those that did not attend, the goal of the Maintainer Entry Profile,
and the Maintainer Handbook more generally, is to provide a desk
reference for maintainers both new and experienced. The session
The first rule of kernel maintenance is that there are no hard and
fast rules. That state of affairs is both a blessing and a curse. It
has served the community well to be adaptable to the different
people and different problem spaces that inhabit the kernel
community. However, that variability also leads to inconsistent
experiences for contributors, little to no guidance for new
contributors, and unnecessary stress on current maintainers. There
are quite a few of people who have been around long enough to make
enough mistakes that they have gained some hard earned proficiency.
However if the kernel community expects to keep growing it needs to
be able both scale the maintainers it has and ramp new ones without
necessarily let them make a decades worth of mistakes to learn the
To be clear, the proposed document does not impose or suggest new
rules. Instead it provides an outlet to document the unwritten rules
and policies in effect for each subsystem, and that each subsystem
might decide differently for whatever reason.
Any maintainer who reads this might interpret this as an encouragement
to establish custom policies. I think one of the conclusions of the
Linux Plumbers 2019 edition is that too much diversity is bad and that
we need more uniformity across kernel subsystems with regard what is
expected from patch contributors. I would appreciate if a summary of
would be integrated in the maintainer handbook.