[Mesa-dev] Workflow Proposal

[Alyssa Rosenzweig]

> > >> I would love to see this be the process across Mesa.  We already don't
> > >> rewrite commit messages for freedreno and i915g, and I only have to do
> > >> the rebase (busy-)work for my projects in other areas of the tree.
> > > Likewise for Panfrost. At least, I don't do the rewriting. Some Panfrost
> > > devs do, which I'm fine with. But it's not a requirement to merging.
> > >
> > > The arguments about "who can help support this years from now?" are moot
> > > at our scale... the team is small enough that the name on the reviewer
> > > is likely the code owner / maintainer, and patches regularly go in
> > > unreviewed for lack of review bandwidth.
> >
> > There is another reason to the Rb tag, that is to measure the quantity
> > of patch review people do.
> >
> > This was well summarized some years ago by Matt Turner, as it was
> > minimized (even suggested to be removed) on a different thread:
> >
> > https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/mesa-dev/2019-January/213586.html
> 
> I was part of the Intel team when people started doing this r-b
> counting.  I believe that it was being done due to Intel management's
> failure to understand who was doing the work on the team and credit
> them appropriately, and also to encourage those doing less to step up.
> Unfortunately, the problem with Intel management wasn't a lack of
> available information, and I didn't see publishing the counts change
> reviews either.

💯

Upstream should do what's best for upstream, not for Intel's "unique"
management.