On Wed, 20 May 2020, Guru Das Srinagesh wrote: > On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 07:44:34AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > > On Fri, 24 Apr 2020, Guru Das Srinagesh wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 07:43:03AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > > > > A great deal of mailing lists contain numerous protections against > > > > things like flooding and spamming. One of those protections is a > > > > check for "Too many recipients to the message". Most of the time this > > > > simply requires moderator intervention by way of review and approval, > > > > but this ultimately depends on the ML's configuration. > > > > > > > > The first thing to ascertain is why your recipients list is so large. > > > > Have you added every reviewer, subsystem-maintainer, maintainer and > > > > contributor suggested by get-maintainer.pl? If so, consider pruning > > > > that a little. Contributors do not tend to care about subsequent > > > > changes to a file. As someone who receives a lot of patches, I tend > > > > to get fed-up when receiving patches simply because I made a change X > > > > years ago. Stick to listed maintainers/reviewers in the first > > > > instance and see how far that takes you. > > > > > > Thank you for the detailed reply. I did this in the first few patchsets > > > and then when a few patches didn't get any attention, expanded the > > > audience thus. Still, around 50% of the patches in this series remain > > > unreviewed by anyone. > > > > This isn't a reason to add more recipients (who are likely to care > > even less than your original group). However it *is* a good argument > > for including all of the specified maintainers/reviewers in on all of > > the patches. > > > > > > If your recipients list is as succinct as reasonably possible, maybe > > > > just accept that every version isn't going to be archived by every > > > > ML. It's still much more useful for the correct people to have > > > > visibility into the set than for it to be archived multiple times. > > > > > > Thank you, will prune the list and remove past contributors from the > > > Cc-list and add all parties to all patches. > > > > Great. Once you've done that, we can start to help you acquire the > > Acks you need on your remaining patches. > > Hi Lee, Thierry, Uwe, > > In v14 of this patchset I've pruned the list of contributors, removed > past contributors from the cc-list, and added all parties to all patches > (except for the patches that are yet to reviewed, for which I've added > what get_maintainer.pl showed me). I've also resent v14 a couple of > times already, with around a week's time interval between resends, and > somehow it seems like this set has lost traction. > > Could you please indicate what next steps I should take to have more > eyes on the unreviewed patches? Only 4 out of 11 patches remain > unreviewed.
Looks like we're waiting on Thierry (again). This has been a common theme over the past few months. Perhaps he has changed employer/project? -- Lee Jones [李琼斯] Linaro Services Technical Lead Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
