[Device-tree] mailing list responsiveness and discoverability

[Brian Norris]

On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 9:10 AM, Stephen Warren <swarren at wwwdotorg.org> wrote:
> On 08/20/2013 08:25 PM, Brian Norris wrote:
>> Hello device tree maintainers,
>>
>> I (sub)maintain the Linux MTD subsystem and hang out on the
>> linux-mtd at infradead.org mailing list. I have been seeing an increasing
>> number of submissions that involve device-tree changes. Many of these
>> changes are ill thought out and may even cause ABI breakage.
>>
>> According to discussions I've seen on LKML, you want to see better
>> bindings merged into the kernel, and you want to maintain more control
>> over the acceptance of bindings in general. However, I see a few
>> problems that have inhibited this.
>>
>> (1) Mailing list change: it just so happens that you recently moved
>> your mailing list to @vger.kernel.org. Some people are still CC'ing
>> the old one (if they CC any DT list at all). I'm not sure what can be
>> done about this, exactly. Perhaps a forwarding rule + a warning
>> response would have been better for a transition period, rather than
>> just shutting down and rejecting from the old one.
>
> Indeed.

Grant, can you do anything about this?

>> (2) Responsiveness: when we finally do CC devicetree at vger.kernel.org,
>> I don't see much feedback, even for those which (when I get around to
>> reviewing them myself) look like they have obvious issues that
>> device-tree maintainers should care about.
>
> The problem here is that the mail volume is extremely high. Even keeping
> up with the content that I'm explicitly CC'd on is difficult, let alone
> the stuff that goes to the list that doesn't CC the binding maintainers.

In the few hours I have been subscribed to the devicetree list, I
already understand this point. Other than avoiding the old mailing
list, then I don't think there's much we can do.

Brian