From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: add myself for kconfig
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2016 17:24:22 +0000
Message-ID: <1452792262.32341.21.camel@citrix.com>
References: <567141D1.7010606@cardoe.com>
	<1450276916-24096-1-git-send-email-cardoe@cardoe.com>
	<1451995643.13361.244.camel@citrix.com>
	<568D288202000078000C3F4E@prv-mh.provo.novell.com>
	<20160106142648.GA8994@deinos.phlegethon.org>
	<D2B2D7B3.246EE%lars.kurth@citrix.com>
	<22157.16687.218537.9204@mariner.uk.xensource.com>
	<D2BD87FC.24C50%lars.kurth@citrix.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <D2BD87FC.24C50%lars.kurth@citrix.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Lars Kurth <lars.kurth@citrix.com>, Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@citrix.com>
Cc: Doug Goldstein <cardoe@cardoe.com>, "Keir (Xen.org)" <keir@xen.org>, "Tim (Xen.org)" <tim@xen.org>, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>, "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

IMNSHO we should apply the patch.

On Thu, 2016-01-14 at 17:19 +0000, Lars Kurth wrote:
> What is the outcome of this discussion?
> Lars
> 
> On 06/01/2016 16:30, "Ian Jackson" <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
> 
> > Lars Kurth writes ("Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: add myself for kconfig"):
> > > As we have seen last year in the survey, in theory - aka according to
> > > our
> > > governance - committers should always act on the wishes (ACKs) of
> > > maintainers. In practice it comes down to whether the committers
> > > trusts
> > > a
> > > maintainer enough to apply patches without a re-review. If we follow
> > > the
> > > trust principle, which IMHO is not really in conflict with the
> > > governance,
> > > there shouldn't be an issue.
> > 
> > Precisely.
> > 
> > > That is unless, we plan to make changes to
> > > how we operate, for which there does not seem to be consensus.
> > 
> > Quite.
> > 
> > Ian.
>