Dave is on the other side of the international date line from those of us in the States. If my time zone math is correct, this thread began and continued *after* the end of his 'normal' Friday workday, during Dave's weekend. You think it might be possible he decided to unplug and actually live for a couple of days? Put this on hold until Monday. -- Stan On 11/9/2013 6:30 PM, Ben Myers wrote: > Dave, > > On Sat, Nov 09, 2013 at 05:51:30PM -0600, Ben Myers wrote: >> 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? > > I should have also suggested that we can add you to this file and just keep our > existing arrangements. That seems appropriate to me, befitting of your > achievements, the work you've been doing, and I'm willing to keep on as I am. > > Regards, > Ben > > _______________________________________________ > xfs mailing list > xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx > http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs > _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
