Hey Ric, On Fri, Nov 08, 2013 at 03:50:21PM -0500, Ric Wheeler wrote: > On 11/08/2013 03:46 PM, Ben Myers wrote: > >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 > > Christoph is not a Red Hat person. > > Jeff is from Oracle. > > This is not a Red Hat vs SGI thing, Sorry if my read on that was wrong. > Dave simply has earned the right > to take on the formal leadership role of maintainer. Then we're gonna need some Reviewed-bys. ;) From: Ben Myers <bpm@xxxxxxx> xfs: update maintainers Add Dave as maintainer of XFS. Signed-off-by: Ben Myers <bpm@xxxxxxx> --- MAINTAINERS | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) Index: b/MAINTAINERS =================================================================== --- a/MAINTAINERS 2013-11-08 15:20:18.935186245 -0600 +++ b/MAINTAINERS 2013-11-08 15:22:50.685245977 -0600 @@ -9387,8 +9387,8 @@ F: drivers/xen/*swiotlb* XFS FILESYSTEM P: Silicon Graphics Inc +M: Dave Chinner <dchinner@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> M: Ben Myers <bpm@xxxxxxx> -M: Alex Elder <elder@xxxxxxxxxx> M: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx L: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx W: http://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
