From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49030) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bf0t4-0003Vt-B8 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 31 Aug 2016 04:28:47 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bf0sz-0004Ye-9E for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 31 Aug 2016 04:28:45 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:42432) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bf0sz-0004YY-3R for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 31 Aug 2016 04:28:41 -0400 Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6EAA281243 for ; Wed, 31 Aug 2016 08:28:40 +0000 (UTC) From: Markus Armbruster References: <87mw8rumhb.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org> <87y4s8h5rh.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org> <876132olyi.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org> <87a8fucx33.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> <48b58aa4-4544-810f-282b-232fbc4d23c4@redhat.com> <87oa4a9sxd.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> <920b7a0b-d031-8c6a-22db-55a5dd04a668@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2016 10:28:37 +0200 In-Reply-To: <920b7a0b-d031-8c6a-22db-55a5dd04a668@redhat.com> (Paolo Bonzini's message of "Tue, 30 Aug 2016 17:33:08 +0200") Message-ID: <87wpix4a16.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] MAINTAINERS leaves too many files uncovered List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Paolo Bonzini Cc: qemu-devel I really shouldn't reply to this, because more maintainer duties is about the last thing I need, but here goes anyway: Paolo Bonzini writes: > On 30/08/2016 17:29, Markus Armbruster wrote: >> > > > Active subsystems lacking a maintainer include tilegx, qdev, repla= y. >> > >=20 >> > > You, Eduardo, me? >> > >> > FWIW I was referring to qdev. >> >> Jointly? > > A subset not including me would also be fine. But since the git > fallback still exists, and the code is _obviously_ maintained, I don't > think there is a particular hurry to add new people to the list. > Maintainers are most useful when there are a lot of simple patches, not > when each patch's design must be discussed in the community. Even then, having someone "own" the discussion is useful: make sure it happens, and stays on track. Moreover, not *all* qdev patches need wider discussion. You're doing a good job picking up such patches to "unmaintained" code. Still, having less "unmaintained" code can only make that job easier. Last but not least, $ scripts/get_maintainer.pl -f hw/core/qdev.c=20 get_maintainer.pl: No maintainers found, printing recent contributors. get_maintainer.pl: Do not blindly cc: them on patches! Use common sens= e. Markus Armbruster (commit_signer:4/12=3D33%) David Gibson (commit_signer:4/12=3D33%) Eric Blake (commit_signer:3/12=3D25%) Igor Mammedov (commit_signer:2/12=3D17%) "Andreas F=C3=A4rber" (commit_signer:2/12=3D17%) qemu-devel@nongnu.org (open list:All patches CC here) must look scary for contributors who don't know that qdev "is _obviously_ maintained".