Hey Christoph, On Fri, Nov 08, 2013 at 11:34:24AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Fri, Nov 08, 2013 at 12:03:37PM -0600, Ben Myers wrote: > > Mark is replacing Alex as my backup because Alex is really busy at > > Linaro and asked to be taken off awhile ago. The holiday season is > > coming up and I fully intend to go off my meds, turn in to Fonzy the > > bear, and eat my hat. I need someone to watch the shop while I'm off > > exploring on Mars. I trust Mark to do that because he is totally > > awesome. > > > Doing this as an unilateral decisions is not something that will win you > a fan base. It's posted for review. > While we never had anything reassembling a democracy in Linux Kernel > development making decisions without even contacting the major > contributor is wrong, twice so if the maintainer is a relatively minor > contributor to start with. > > Just because it recent came up elsewhere I'd like to recite the > definition from Trond here again: > > http://lists.linux-foundation.org/pipermail/ksummit-2012-discuss/2012-June/000066.html > > By many of the creative roles enlisted there it's clear that Dave should > be the maintainer. He's been the main contributor and chief architect > for XFS for many year, while the maintainers came and went at the mercy > of SGI. This is not meant to bad mouth either of you as I think you're > doing a reasonably good job compared to other maintainers, but at the > same time the direction is set by other people that have a much longer > involvement with the project, and having them officially in control > would help us forward a lot. It would also avoid having to spend > considerable resources to train every new generation of SGI maintainer. > > Coming to and end I would like to maintain Dave Chinner as the primary > XFS maintainer for all the work he has done as biggest contributor and > architect of XFS since longer than I can remember, and I would love to > retain Ben Myers as a co-maintainer for all the good work he has done > maintaining and reviewing patches since November 2011. I think we're doing a decent job too. So thanks for that much at least. ;) > I would also like to use this post as a public venue to condemn the > unilateral smokey backroom decisions about XFS maintainership that SGI is > trying to enforce on the community. That really didn't happen Christoph. It's not in my tree or in a pull request. Linus, let me know what you want to do. I do think we're doing a fair job over here, and (geez) I'm just trying to add Mark as my backup since Alex is too busy. I know the RH people want more control, and that's understandable, but they really don't need to replace me to get their code in. Ouch. Thanks, Ben _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
