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=-10.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 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 5F77BC433DB for ; Mon, 8 Mar 2021 13:19:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (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 D31666519D for ; Mon, 8 Mar 2021 13:19:03 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org D31666519D 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]:33318 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lJFmo-0004PK-Pc for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Mon, 08 Mar 2021 08:19:02 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:38056) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lJF4r-0001I4-WE for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 08 Mar 2021 07:33:38 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.133.124]:59890) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lJF4p-0002Yd-Te for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 08 Mar 2021 07:33:37 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1615206814; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=5lBmIHFbfOJtocikMMqxDTcqd8zFsvSrvNEZkYY0BLI=; b=bCPN1R7gOweAKAilgp2tpBWagP88MDbLu61ktvWqvW6Ig7TTWhBCi1VAJoNbRAyqDy98RX 9vtwbDFVsezMbQzqRCiPD3AWW80eQarXjEB9AHUN+4Rgx6ZfPGQH4yTJyEXvc2udGkE7Qj /SIdtCRHStppe8L4zQ1USnqB0+z0soE= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-36-tVHes7RZOGqKcrX73lfIHw-1; Mon, 08 Mar 2021 07:33:31 -0500 X-MC-Unique: tVHes7RZOGqKcrX73lfIHw-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4265E814314; Mon, 8 Mar 2021 12:33:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from thuth.remote.csb (ovpn-113-198.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.113.198]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 698D019709; Mon, 8 Mar 2021 12:33:24 +0000 (UTC) To: =?UTF-8?Q?Alex_Benn=c3=a9e?= References: <20210307113403.11028-1-thuth@redhat.com> <878s6xam83.fsf@linaro.org> From: Thomas Huth Subject: Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: Merge the Gitlab-CI section into the generic CI section Message-ID: Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2021 13:33:23 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <878s6xam83.fsf@linaro.org> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.23 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=thuth@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received-SPF: pass client-ip=170.10.133.124; envelope-from=thuth@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -29 X-Spam_score: -3.0 X-Spam_bar: --- X-Spam_report: (-3.0 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.251, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action 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: , Cc: Peter Maydell , =?UTF-8?Q?Philippe_Mathieu-Daud=c3=a9?= , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Willian Rampazzo , Wainer dos Santos Moschetta Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On 08/03/2021 12.57, Alex Bennée wrote: > > Thomas Huth writes: > >> The status of the gitlab-CI files is currently somewhat confusing, and >> it is often not quite clear whether a patch should go via my tree or >> via the testing tree of Alex. That situation has grown historically... >> Initially, I was the only one using the gitlab-CI, just for my private >> repository there. But in the course of time, the gitlab-CI switched to >> use the containers from tests/docker/ (which is not part of the gitlab-CI >> section in the MAINTAINERS file), and QEMU now even switched to gitlab.com >> completely for the repository and will soon use it as its gating CI, too. >> So it makes way more sense if the gitlab-ci.yml files belong to the people >> who are owning the qemu-project on gitlab.com and take care of the gitlab >> CI there. Thus let's merge the gitlab-ci section into the common "test and >> build automation" section, > > I have no problem with this, might as well keep it all together. > >> and change the status of myself to a "reviewer" >> there instead. > > Can we not have multiple maintainers? Considering how important keeping > the testing green should be wouldn't it help to keep the bus factor > lower (not to mention holidays/breaks and just plain busy with other > things periods). It shouldn't be to hard to track as long as we mention > when we queue things to our trees? Sure, it certainly makes sense to have multiple maintainers, but I think in this section, it might be better to also have someone who's also a maintainer of the qemu-project at gitlab (in case there's something to fix/setup with a custom runner for example, and to avoid wrong expectations)? Maybe Peter finally wants to join here to get finally away from his exclusive merge tests? Thomas