From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=3.0 tests=FROM_EXCESS_BASE64, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBE93C2BCA1 for ; Fri, 7 Jun 2019 11:10:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.47]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B5E24212F5 for ; Fri, 7 Jun 2019 11:10:50 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org B5E24212F5 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:48446 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hZCll-0007ZW-S9 for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Fri, 07 Jun 2019 07:10:49 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:57390) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hZBf6-0007zE-2R for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 07 Jun 2019 05:59:53 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hZBf4-0005kg-0W for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 07 Jun 2019 05:59:51 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:58826) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hZBf3-0005Yd-PO for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 07 Jun 2019 05:59:49 -0400 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3336D6EB9A; Fri, 7 Jun 2019 09:59:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from redhat.com (ovpn-112-33.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.112.33]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 58F8D7FCE2; Fri, 7 Jun 2019 09:59:33 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2019 10:59:30 +0100 From: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= To: Markus Armbruster Message-ID: <20190607095930.GA28838@redhat.com> References: <87woihi1wl.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> <20190524185344.GJ10764@habkost.net> <87r28k1g4q.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> <875zphg9t8.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <875zphg9t8.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.4 (2019-03-13) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.15 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.25]); Fri, 07 Jun 2019 09:59:44 +0000 (UTC) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 209.132.183.28 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] qapi/misc.json is too big, let's bite off a few chunks X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= Cc: Eduardo Habkost , Philippe =?utf-8?Q?Mathieu-Daud=C3=A9?= , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, =?utf-8?Q?Marc-Andr=C3=A9?= Lureau , Paolo Bonzini , Andreas =?utf-8?Q?F=C3=A4rber?= , Richard Henderson Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On Fri, Jun 07, 2019 at 08:59:31AM +0200, Markus Armbruster wrote: > Paolo Bonzini writes: >=20 > > On 27/05/19 10:00, Markus Armbruster wrote: > >> As long as we don't have an active QOM maintainer[*], the benefit is > >> low. > >>=20 > >>=20 > >> [*] We need one. I'm not volunteering. > > > > I think Daniel, Eduardo and I could count as de facto maintainer. I > > guess I could maintain it if I get two partners in crime as reviewers= . >=20 > Alright, we need two volunteers for the reviewer role, and one patch to > MAINTAINERS. >=20 > A mention in MAINTAINERS is the traditional punishment for good work, s= o > let's see who's been doing the work. Aha: >=20 > Eduardo Habkost > Marc-Andr=C3=A9 Lureau > Markus Armbruster > Eric Blake > Philippe Mathieu-Daud=C3=A9 >=20 > Details appended. >=20 > QOM is not a particularly active subsystem now: 51 commits in two years= . >=20 > We obviously need maintainers to review and merge patches. The nominal > maintainer hasn't been doing that since 2015. Git shows the following > top committers taking on / getting sucked into QOM: >=20 > Markus Armbruster > Eduardo Habkost > Paolo Bonzini > Marc-Andr=C3=A9 Lureau > Eric Blake >=20 > We really need nominal maintainer(s) again. >=20 > Of course, *active* maintainers would be even better: I consider QOM > stuck in an unhappy place where much of its potential is still > potential. >=20 > But let's start small. Volunteers for the reviewer role, please step > forward :) I'm happy to be a reviewer since I understand the code fairly well. I don't want to volunteer to be maintainer as I can't promise to be timely at dealing with yet another patch queue. Regards, Daniel --=20 |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberran= ge :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.c= om :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberran= ge :|