[PATCH 10/11] doc: move drm-misc committer guidelines

[Emil Velikov]

On Thu, 25 Oct 2018 at 16:23, Jani Nikula <jani.nikula at intel.com> wrote:
>
> Move drm-misc under the common committer guidelines.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula at intel.com>
> ---
>  committer-drm-misc.rst   | 101 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  committer-guidelines.rst |   1 +
>  drm-misc.rst             |  95 --------------------------------------------
>  3 files changed, 102 insertions(+), 95 deletions(-)
>  create mode 100644 committer-drm-misc.rst
>
> diff --git a/committer-drm-misc.rst b/committer-drm-misc.rst
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..b44bf9c7dcf7
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/committer-drm-misc.rst
> @@ -0,0 +1,101 @@
> +.. _committer-drm-misc:
> +
> +===============================
> + drm-misc Committer Guidelines
> +===============================
> +
> +This document describes the detailed merge criteria and committer guidelines for
> +drm-misc. The same criteria and guidelines apply equally to both committers and
> +maintainers.
> +
> +Where Do I Apply My Patch?
> +==========================
> +
> +Consult this handy flowchart to determine the best branch for your patch. If in
> +doubt, apply to drm-misc-next or ask your favorite maintainer on IRC.
> +
> +.. image:: drm-misc-commit-flow.svg
> +
> +Merge Criteria
> +==============
> +
> +Right now the only hard merge criteria are:
> +
> +* Patch is properly reviewed or at least Ack, i.e. don't just push your own
> +  stuff directly. This rule holds even more for bugfix patches - it would be
> +  embarrassing if the bugfix contains a small gotcha that review would have
> +  caught.
> +
> +* drm-misc is for drm core (non-driver) patches, subsystem-wide refactorings,
> +  and small trivial patches all over (including drivers). For a detailed list of
> +  what's all maintained in drm-misc grep for "drm-misc" in MAINTAINERS.
> +
> +* Larger features can be merged through drm-misc too, but in some cases
> +  (especially when there are cross-subsystem conflicts) it might make sense to
> +  merge patches through a dedicated topic tree. The dim_ tooling has full
> +  support for them, if needed.
> +
> +* Any non-linear actions (backmerges, merging topic branches and sending out
> +  pull requests) are only done by the official drm-misc maintainers (see
> +  MAINTAINERS, or ask #dri-devel), and not by committers. See the
> +  `examples section in dim <dim.html#examples>`_ for more info
> +
> +* All the x86, arm and arm64 DRM drivers need to still compile. To simplify this
> +  we track defconfigs for all three platforms in the `drm-intel-rerere` branch.
> +
> +* The goal is to also pre-check everything with CI. Unfortunately neither the
> +  arm side (using kernelci.org and generic i-g-t tests) nor the Intel side
> +  (using Intel CI infrastructure and the full i-g-t suite) isn't yet fully ready
> +  for production.
> +
> +* No rebasing out mistakes, because this is a shared tree.
> +
> +* See also the extensive :ref:`committer-drm-intel`.
> +
> +Small Drivers
> +=============
> +
> +Small drivers, where a full tree is overkill, can be maintained in drm-misc. For
> +now there are just a few drivers maintained in drm-misc, but we can slowly add
> +more to figure out how to make this scale. Slightly different rules apply:
> +
> +* Small is measured in patches merged per kernel release. The occasional big
> +  patch series is still acceptable if it's not a common thing (e.g. new hw
> +  enabling once a year), and if the series is really big (more than 20 patches)
> +  it should probably be managed through a topic branch in drm-misc and with a
> +  separate pull request to drm maintainer. dim_ supports this with the
> +  create-branch command. Everything that doesn't justify a topic branch goes
> +  into the normal drm-misc branches directly.
> +
> +* Group maintainership is assumed, i.e. all regular contributors (not just
> +  the primary maintainer) will get commit rights.
> +
> +* Since even a broken driver is more useful than no driver minimal review
> +  standards are a lot lower. The default should be some notes about what could
> +  be improved in follow-up work and accepting patches by default. Maintainer
> +  group for drivers can agree on stricter rules, especially when they have a
> +  bigger user base that shouldn't suffer from regressions.
> +
> +* Minimal peer-review is also expected for drivers with just one contributor,
> +  but obviously then only focuses on best practices for the interaction with drm
> +  core and helpers. Plus a bit looking for common patterns in dealing with the
> +  hardware, since display IP all has to handle the same issues in the end. In
> +  most cases this will just along the lines of "Looks good, Ack".  drm-misc
> +  maintainers will help out with getting that review market going.
> +
> +* Best practice for review: When you have some suggestions and comments for
> +  future work, please make sure you don't forget your Ack tag to unblock the
> +  original patch. And if you think something really must be fixed before
> +  merging, please give a conditional Ack along the lines of "Fix
> +  $specific_thing, with that addressed, Ack". The goal is to always have a clear
> +  and reasonable speedy path towards getting the patch merged. For authors on
> +  the other side, just do the minimal rework and push the patch, and do any
> +  more involved rework in follow-up work. This way lengthy review cycles get
> +  avoided, which are a drag for both reviewer and author.
> +
> +Tooling
> +=======
> +
> +drm-intel git repositories are managed with dim_.

AFAICT all the drm repositories - drm-misc, drm-tip and drm-intel are
managed with dim. Isn't that right?

Orthogonal to that, the original documentation says "drm-misc" here.
Personally I'd keep that since this is the commiters-mis.rst

HTH
Emil