Re: [Qemu-devel] seccomp submaintainer? (was Re: [PATCH] seccomp: adding times() to the whitelist)

[Paul Moore <pmoore@redhat.com>]

On Monday, September 09, 2013 03:48:09 PM Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 09/09/2013 15:20, Eduardo Otubo ha scritto:
> >> Out of respect for the work that Eduardo has done, and is
> >> continuing to do, with the QEMU seccomp filtering, I think Eduardo
> >> should be the one to take on this role. If Eduardo declines I'll do
> >> ahead and submit a patch adding myself to the MAINTAINERS file.
> > 
> > If this is ok for everyone, I would be really glad to take this role to
> > myself. Paul, thanks for this vote of confidence. Paolo, should I send a
> > patch for MAINTAINERS right away?
> 
> Ok, I was suggesting Paul because he was the one doing reviews.
> 
> Eduardo, that is also okay for me.  However, even as a maintainer please
> do wait for Paul's reviews.  Many areas of QEMU have maintainers that do
> not send their own patches without a review, so this wouldn't be a new
> rule. :)

Okay, with respect to maintainership, I was thinking more along the lines of 
the Linux Kernel where those that do the work get the job; it looks like QEMU 
has a slightly different twist on the idea.  If it makes more sense to the 
QEMU devs you can always add me as a co-maintainer.

Regardless, I do plan on continuing to review/test patches and I don't expect 
that to change in the near future.

> Please wait for Anthony's ack.  I changed the subject and CCed him to
> grab his attention.
> 
> Paolo

-- 
paul moore
security and virtualization @ redhat