Hey Neil, On Sat, Nov 09, 2013 at 10:44:24AM +1100, NeilBrown wrote: > On Sat, 9 Nov 2013 06:59:00 +0800 Zhi Yong Wu <zwu.kernel@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Sat, Nov 9, 2013 at 6:03 AM, Ben Myers <bpm@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > 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> > > Use his personal private mail account? I guess that you should ask for > > his opinion at first, or it is more appropriate that he submit this > > patch by himself. If y'all don't mind, I'd like to have authored this one. ;) > Indeed. And does he even want the job? I heard Linus say in a recent > interview that being a maintainer is a $#!+ job. I've found that it can be a little bit stressful sometimes and it tends to crowd out feature work, so I guess I agree with him. It turns out to be an excellent weight loss plan. > Is it really best for the > most active developers to be burdened with that extra work? > > (hmm.. maybe I should add Dave to the Cc here .. but no-one else did so best > leave him alone to code in peace). Dave, what do you want to do here? Which email? What sort of arrangement? I gather that you probably do want the job, and I know you'll be fantastic. Do you want to do it all yourself? Maybe split it up? Thanks, Ben _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
