Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: Remove some entries due to various compliance requirements.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: Remove some entries due to various compliance requirements.
- From: Mingcong Bai <jeffbai@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2024 15:32:50 +0800
- Cc: gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, patches@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, nikita@xxxxxxx, ink@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, shc_work@xxxxxxx, richard.henderson@xxxxxxxxxx, mattst88@xxxxxxxxx, linux-alpha@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, fancer.lancer@xxxxxxxxx, linux-hwmon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, dmaengine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xeb@xxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, s.shtylyov@xxxxxx, linux-ide@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, serjk@xxxxxxxx, aospan@xxxxxxxx, linux-media@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, ddrokosov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-iio@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, v.georgiev@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-mips@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, ntb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-renesas-soc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-gpio@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-spi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, dushistov@xxxxxxx, manivannan.sadhasivam@xxxxxxxxxx, conor.dooley@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-fpga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, tsbogend@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, hoan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, wsa+renesas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- In-reply-to: <A74519B4332040FA+20241023063058.223139-1-wangyuli@uniontech.com>
- Organization: Anthon Open Source Community
- References: <2024101835-tiptop-blip-09ed@gregkh> <A74519B4332040FA+20241023063058.223139-1-wangyuli@uniontech.com>
Greetings all,
在 2024-10-23 14:30,WangYuli 写道:
Although this commit has been merged, it's still important to know the
specific reason (or even an example) that triggered this change for
everyone here, right?
And those maintainers who have been removed should be notified.
Seconded.
It should be CC'd everyone who might need to be aware of this change,
including the removed maintainers, other maintainers on the subsystem,
and the subsystem's mailing list.
To ensure transparency.
This patch is one such instance where we find ourselves questioning the
legitimacy and indeed, the feasibility, of an international, open, and
open source project. Vagueness breeds distrust.
It's not difficult to deduce what the "various compliance requirements"
are and I'm sure Greg is aware of this. The Linux Foundation, if
interested in continuing their governance role over the Linux kernel,
should be ready to explain themselves over this decision. Greg and
Linus, I'm not sure if I'm ready to believe that this is supposed to be
a political show - but if this is the case, please leave the ground for
the Foundation - they should be the one responsible and receiving the
scrutiny (or insult, as I'm sure many - myself included - find this
patch insulting).
So I repeat - call the decision-makers out and ask for their
explanation.
Best Regards,
Mingcong Bai
[Index of Archives]
[Linux Kernel]
[Linux ARM (vger)]
[Linux ARM MSM]
[Linux Omap]
[Linux Arm]
[Linux Tegra]
[Fedora ARM]
[Linux for Samsung SOC]
[eCos]
[Linux Fastboot]
[Gcc Help]
[Git]
[DCCP]
[IETF Announce]
[Security]
[Linux MIPS]
[Yosemite Campsites]
|