[PATCH] Documentation tweak to SendingPatches.

[Rob Landley]

Random first stab at it, flame away.

(Yes, I'd be happy to split out the bit about log rolling into a separate
patch.  I probably should anyway, on general principles... :)

Rob

--- linux-2.5.70/Documentation/SubmittingPatches	2003-05-26 21:00:20.000000000 -0400
+++ linux-new/Documentation/SubmittingPatches	2003-06-11 14:01:23.000000000 -0400
@@ -92,6 +92,16 @@
 complete, that is OK.  Simply note "this patch depends on patch X"
 in your patch description.
 
+In politics, there's a concept called "log rolling", where unrelated
+amendments are bundled together so that changes people want grease the
+way for changes they don't.  Do not do this.  It's insulting.
+
+In coding, this sort of thing can be very subtle, such as performance increases
+that help your new version perform as well as the original while doing more
+work, but which could also have been applied to the original making it even
+faster.  The linux-kernel guys are very good at taking the chocolate coating
+and leaving the pill behind.  This can be very frustrating to developers, but
+it's one of the big reasons open source produces such excellent results.
 
 4) Select e-mail destination.
 
@@ -175,9 +185,14 @@
 If the patch does not apply cleanly to the latest kernel version,
 Linus will not apply it.
 
+9) Include PATCH in the subject
 
+Due to high e-mail traffic to Linus, and to linux-kernel, it is common
+convention to prefix your subject line with [PATCH].  This lets Linus
+and other kernel developers more easily distinguish patches from other
+e-mail discussions.
 
-9) Don't get discouraged.  Re-submit.
+10) Don't get discouraged.  Re-submit.
 
 After you have submitted your change, be patient and wait.  If Linus
 likes your change and applies it, it will appear in the next version
@@ -201,16 +216,56 @@
 
 When in doubt, solicit comments on linux-kernel mailing list.
 
+11) Follow the chain (or "Why is Linus ignoring me?")
 
-
-10) Include PATCH in the subject
-
-Due to high e-mail traffic to Linus, and to linux-kernel, it is common
-convention to prefix your subject line with [PATCH].  This lets Linus
-and other kernel developers more easily distinguish patches from other
-e-mail discussions.
-
-
+These days, Linus is too overwhelmed to reliably accept patches directly
+from developers he doesn't know.  Furthermore, Linus is unlikely to respond
+to unsolicited email, since he gets so much of it he reads most with the
+delete key.  If your patch is being repeatedly ignored, resending it more than
+a few times can get frustrating.  There's a better way.
+
+The slow but steady way to get patches into the development kernel is a three
+step process:
+
+  A) Get the maintainer's approval.
+  B) Get the subsystem lieutenant's approval.
+  C) Get it to Linus.
+
+The maintainer is listed in the MAINTAINERS file.  This is the first person
+you should approach with your patch, as they're the only ones who owe you
+any kind of response if they've never heard of you before.  (Notice they
+do not owe you a _polite_ response.  Be nice.)
+
+Maintainers report to lieutenants, which are like subsystem maintainers.
+There are over a hundred maintainers, but only about a dozen lieutenants.
+They're not listed anywhere, but the maintainer you contact should know who
+they report to.  (If the maintainer doesn't respond after a week or so,
+you could try asking on linux kernel.)  The maintainer may take your patch
+and forward it on themselves, or sign off on it and send you on to the
+appropriate lieutanant with their blessing but not their spare time.
+
+Lieutanants report to Linus.  They're the only people who can ding him
+for not answering their email.  Linus responds fairly reliably to his
+lieutenants, lieutenants respond to maintainers, and maintainers should
+respond to you.  If you follow the chain, at each stage you will be talking
+to somebody who more or less owes you an answer, even if that answer is "no".
+
+The farther away from Linus people are, the more time they're likely to have
+to respond to your email.  The response may be "no, that's a bad idea", but
+it's better than being left hanging.
+
+11) Listen to feedback.
+
+If a maintainer, lieutenant, or Linus tells you something specific is wrong
+with your patch, this is a GOOD thing.  It means you've been given the
+opportunity to fix it.  It's not meant to be discouraging, if they wanted to
+discourage you they'd either ignore you or explicitly tell you to stop
+bothering them.
+
+If Linus himself replies to you by telling you your patch has something wrong
+with it, you have just been encouraged.  Same goes for lieutenants and
+maintainers.  When they tell you what you need to do to make the thing
+palatable to them, you've been given the opportunity to fix it and resubmit.
 
 -----------------------------------
 SECTION 2 - HINTS, TIPS, AND TRICKS