Re: about the flood of trivial patches and the Code of Conduct (was: Re: [PATCH 19/25] sched: Use bool function return values of true/false not 1/0)

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Tue, Apr 07, 2015 at 01:28:27PM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> Can't we send all these kind of patches through the trivial tree?
> Don't get me wrong, if you are fine with these patches that's you decision.
> But other maintainers might think they have to take these patches and
> get overloaded. I'm thinking of drivers maintainers that can only work
> one or two hours per week on Linux.
> Not everyone works full time on it like you.
> 
> I propose to send all this stuff though the trivial tree such that maintainers
> of other subsystems have less workload and newbies (which are supposed
> to send such patches) know which tree they have to work against.
> Let's have to well defined and ordered. :-)

As per the other branch of this tree; an emphatic NO to that. The
trivial tree is not a backdoor to bypass maintainers. Actual code
changes do not get to go through any tree but the maintainer tree unless
explicitly ACKed.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/