On 1/29/24 03:22, Bernd Schubert wrote: > Hi Nikolaus, > > On 1/29/24 09:56, Nikolaus Rath wrote: >> [Resend as text/plain so it doesn't bounce from linux-fsdevel@] >> >> Hello everyone, >> >> The time that I have availability for libfuse maintenance is a lot less today than it was a few years ago, and I don't expect that to change. > > firstly. thanks a lot for your great work over the last years! > >> >> For a while, it has worked reasonably well for other people to submit pull requests that I can review and merge, and for me to make regular releases based on that. >> >> Recently, I've become increasingly uncomfortable with this. My familiarity with the code and context is getting smaller and smaller, so it takes me more and more time to review pull requests and the quality of my reviews and understanding is decreasing. >> >> Therefore, I don't think this trajectory is sustainable. It takes too much of my time while adding too little value, and also gives the misleading impression of the state of affairs. >> >> If anyone has ideas for how libfuse could be maintained, please let me know. >> >> Currently I see these options: >> >> 1. Fully automate merge requests and releases, i.e. merge anything that passes unit tests and release every x months (or, more likely, just ask people to download current Git head). > > Please not, that is quite dangerous. I don't think the tests are > perfect, especially with compatibility tests are missing. In principle > we would need to get github to run tests on different kernel versions - > no idea how to do that. > > >> >> 2. Declare it as unmaintained and archive the Github project >> >> 3. Someone else takes over my role. I'd like this to be someone with a history of contributions though, because libfuse is a perfect target for supply chain attacks and I don't want to make this too easy. > > I'm maintaining our DDN internal version anyway - I think I can help to > maintain libfuse / take it over. > > Btw, I also think that kernel fuse needs a maintenance team - I think > currently patches are getting forgotten about - I'm planning to set up > my own fuse-bernd-next branch with patches, which I think should be > considered - I just didn't get to that yet. > > > Thanks, > Bernd +1 for Bernd's maintenance *team* idea. But perhaps extended to libfuse as well? There are a number of us who are familiar with the code and at least semi-active in the space. Help spread the load. I could help out at least on the libfuse side.
