From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:52464) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VJ2hv-0006RA-00 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 09 Sep 2013 10:44:56 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VJ2hp-0000Wr-0c for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 09 Sep 2013 10:44:50 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:63375) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VJ2ho-0000Wm-N6 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 09 Sep 2013 10:44:44 -0400 From: Paul Moore Date: Mon, 09 Sep 2013 10:44:40 -0400 Message-ID: <5541403.3IaE33qAHr@sifl> In-Reply-To: <522DD199.2020508@redhat.com> References: <1378297508-7242-1-git-send-email-otubo@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <522DCB0A.30406@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <522DD199.2020508@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] seccomp submaintainer? (was Re: [PATCH] seccomp: adding times() to the whitelist) List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Paolo Bonzini , Eduardo Otubo , Anthony Liguori Cc: coreyb@linux.vnet.ibm.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org 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