Re: [PATCH] update xfs maintainers

[Stan Hoeppner <stan@hardwarefreak.com>]

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@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, Nov 9, 2013 at 6:03 AM, Ben Myers <bpm@sgi.com> 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@sgi.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> xfs: update maintainers
>>>>>
>>>>> Add Dave as maintainer of XFS.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Ben Myers <bpm@sgi.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>  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@fromorbit.com>
>>>> 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@oss.sgi.com
> http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
> 

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs