Some 5.1 development statistics
Some 5.1 development statistics
Posted Apr 26, 2019 16:47 UTC (Fri) by moorray (guest, #54145)Parent article: Some 5.1 development statistics
I used to understand why patches coming to the ML with reviews already on was bad, but now, having gained more experience, I'm no longer so sure..
A major reason to review the patches internally first, is that the quality is not always great. We probably don't need 10 upstream maintainers/reviewers pointing out to their team members that they forgot a kfree() in a public forum, just because of the email volume.
As far as the reviews go - I certainly want the employees who spend their time reviewing code see their contribution acknowledged. The maintainer above me knows the people and the value of their tags, regardless of the employer.
A major reason to review the patches internally first, is that the quality is not always great. We probably don't need 10 upstream maintainers/reviewers pointing out to their team members that they forgot a kfree() in a public forum, just because of the email volume.
As far as the reviews go - I certainly want the employees who spend their time reviewing code see their contribution acknowledged. The maintainer above me knows the people and the value of their tags, regardless of the employer.