Re: [PATCH] u-boot: Update to 2017.03 release

[Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Wed, 2017-03-29 at 17:56 -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 04:31:16PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > 
> > On 03/27/2017 04:25 PM, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > > 
> > > On Mon, 2017-03-27 at 16:22 +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > Upgrade U-Boot to the latest version.
> > > Wrong list and how does this compare to Ovatio's patch?
> > I was not CCed on Otavio's patch :(
> Yeah, me neither, unfortunately - people just ignore maintainers file
> now.
> 
> Good thing Ross copied me on the other discussion!

This raises a very valid point which is what any maintainers file is
and what it is not.

The one that exists in meta-yocto today has a very specific meaning. I
know there is discussion about moving it to OE-Core however if we do so
I want to by *really* *really* clear about what being listed there
means and does not mean.

As things stand right now, there is no requirement or advice in any of
our guides to cc "maintainers". People struggle to send patches as it
is and giving them more hoops to jump through doesn't seem like a
brilliant idea to me. I know we can create a file with all kinds of
path matching for files people care/don't care about but I worry this
will descend into complicated scripts and people still getting upset
when they were cc'd needlessly or weren't cc'd etc.

I also quite strongly dislike the "I own X, so only I can change it"
type view, to be the maintainers are people who help look after
specific areas in the absence of anyone else and help review patches
that come in. They certainly get significant influence on things but
the price for that is they also have to help fix issues and figure out
ways of helping others with issues in that area.

So please think very carefully about what you want this "maintainers"
file to be/not be as I worry its a huge can of worms we once tried in
OE before...

Cheers,

Richard