U-Boot patch submit standard and requirement

[Peter Robinson]

Hi Brian,

You have made a very generic statement about levels of accountability
on patch sets and consistency in reviews.

Can you be more specific?

Ultimately there are subsystem maintainers and each maintainer has
variation on how they deal with their subsystem. You reference one doc
three times in your statement.

Ultimately the rules are there as guidance and if someone chooses not
to follow them to the letter there is little that can be done. if the
individual becomes problematic they will be asked, publicly or
privately depending on the situation, if they could better comply and
there may be further action.

It's very hard to act on your generic statement without examples,.

Peter

On Thu, 14 May 2026 at 09:41, Sune Brian <briansune at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 14, 2026 at 3:29 PM Peter Robinson <pbrobinson at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Brian,
> >
> > Can you provide more context?
>
> Hi Peter,
>
> Not getting you sorry.
> Context means?
>
> Thanks,
> Brian
>
> >
> > Peter
> >
> > On Thu, 14 May 2026 at 03:02, Sune Brian <briansune at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Tom,
> > >
> > > Sorry to bother you.
> > >
> > > I am curious that for me myself I had no issue to follow
> > > the requirements [1] as long as all patches that are
> > > passing the review stage do follow the rules in [1].
> > > However based on most recent commits and reviews
> > > most of those are not even close to what [1] mentioned.
> > >
> > > So at the end, reviewers in U-Boot just made their own
> > > standard and requested contributors to follow?
> > >
> > > Rather the U-Boot itself should all follow the docs rules?
> > >
> > > [1] https://docs.u-boot.org/en/latest/develop/sending_patches.html#sending-updated-patch-versions
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Brian