1.. _maintainerentryprofile: 2 3Maintainer Entry Profile 4======================== 5 6The Maintainer Entry Profile supplements the top-level process documents 7(submitting-patches, submitting drivers...) with 8subsystem/device-driver-local customs as well as details about the patch 9submission life-cycle. A contributor uses this document to level set 10their expectations and avoid common mistakes; maintainers may use these 11profiles to look across subsystems for opportunities to converge on 12common practices. 13 14 15Overview 16-------- 17Provide an introduction to how the subsystem operates. While MAINTAINERS 18tells the contributor where to send patches for which files, it does not 19convey other subsystem-local infrastructure and mechanisms that aid 20development. 21 22Example questions to consider: 23 24- Are there notifications when patches are applied to the local tree, or 25 merged upstream? 26- Does the subsystem have a patchwork instance? Are patchwork state 27 changes notified? 28- Any bots or CI infrastructure that watches the list, or automated 29 testing feedback that the subsystem uses to gate acceptance? 30- Git branches that are pulled into -next? 31- What branch should contributors submit against? 32- Links to any other Maintainer Entry Profiles? For example a 33 device-driver may point to an entry for its parent subsystem. This makes 34 the contributor aware of obligations a maintainer may have for 35 other maintainers in the submission chain. 36 37 38Submit Checklist Addendum 39------------------------- 40List mandatory and advisory criteria, beyond the common "submit-checklist", 41for a patch to be considered healthy enough for maintainer attention. 42For example: "pass checkpatch.pl with no errors, or warning. Pass the 43unit test detailed at $URI". 44 45The Submit Checklist Addendum can also include details about the status 46of related hardware specifications. For example, does the subsystem 47require published specifications at a certain revision before patches 48will be considered. 49 50 51Key Cycle Dates 52--------------- 53One of the common misunderstandings of submitters is that patches can be 54sent at any time before the merge window closes and can still be 55considered for the next -rc1. The reality is that most patches need to 56be settled in soaking in linux-next in advance of the merge window 57opening. Clarify for the submitter the key dates (in terms of -rc release 58week) that patches might be considered for merging and when patches need to 59wait for the next -rc. At a minimum: 60 61- Last -rc for new feature submissions: 62 New feature submissions targeting the next merge window should have 63 their first posting for consideration before this point. Patches that 64 are submitted after this point should be clear that they are targeting 65 the NEXT+1 merge window, or should come with sufficient justification 66 why they should be considered on an expedited schedule. A general 67 guideline is to set expectation with contributors that new feature 68 submissions should appear before -rc5. 69 70- Last -rc to merge features: Deadline for merge decisions 71 Indicate to contributors the point at which an as yet un-applied patch 72 set will need to wait for the NEXT+1 merge window. Of course there is no 73 obligation to ever accept any given patchset, but if the review has not 74 concluded by this point the expectation is the contributor should wait and 75 resubmit for the following merge window. 76 77Optional: 78 79- First -rc at which the development baseline branch, listed in the 80 overview section, should be considered ready for new submissions. 81 82 83Review Cadence 84-------------- 85One of the largest sources of contributor angst is how soon to ping 86after a patchset has been posted without receiving any feedback. In 87addition to specifying how long to wait before a resubmission this 88section can also indicate a preferred style of update like, resend the 89full series, or privately send a reminder email. This section might also 90list how review works for this code area and methods to get feedback 91that are not directly from the maintainer. 92 93Existing profiles 94----------------- 95 96For now, existing maintainer profiles are listed here; we will likely want 97to do something different in the near future. 98 99.. toctree:: 100 :maxdepth: 1 101 102 ../doc-guide/maintainer-profile 103 ../nvdimm/maintainer-entry-profile 104 ../riscv/patch-acceptance 105