[PATCH for-4.11 v2 0/2] Add Designated Reviewer (R:) to MAINTAINERS (plus a test case)

[PATCH for-4.11 v2 0/2] Add Designated Reviewer (R:) to MAINTAINERS (plus a test case)

[Lars Kurth]

This follows up from a conversation after the April x86 community call, in which I had
the following action: Lars to propose fixing CC issue in xen.git:MAINTAINERS copying 
the R section entries from Linux.git:MAINTAINERS (will need changes to 
get_maintainers.pl also)

On 27/4/18 Juergen gave a RAB via IRC

Cc: Lars Kurth <lars.kurth@citrix.com>
Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
Cc: George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com>
Cc: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>
Cc: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
Cc: Julien Grall <julien.grall@arm.com>
Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
Cc: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>
Cc: Tim Deegan <tim@xen.org>
Cc: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>
Cc: Brian Woods <brian.woods@amd.com>
Cc: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>

Release-acked-by: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>
Acked-by: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>

Lars Kurth (2):
  Add Brian Woods as Designated reviewer to AMD IOMMU and AMD SVM
  Add Designated Reviewer (R:) to MAINTAINERS file and add support for
    it in get_maintainer.pl

 MAINTAINERS               |  4 ++++
 scripts/get_maintainer.pl | 24 +++++++++++-------------
 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

-- 
2.13.0


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel

[PATCH for-4.11 v2 1/2] Add Brian Woods as Designated reviewer to AMD IOMMU and AMD SVM

[Lars Kurth]

This was discussed in an IRC discussion post the April x86 meeting.
On 27/4/18 Juergen gave a RAB via IRC

Cc: Lars Kurth <lars.kurth@citrix.com>
Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
Cc: George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com>
Cc: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>
Cc: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
Cc: Julien Grall <julien.grall@arm.com>
Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
Cc: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>
Cc: Tim Deegan <tim@xen.org>
Cc: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>
Cc: Brian Woods <brian.woods@amd.com>
Cc: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Lars Kurth <lars.kurth@citrix.com>

Release-acked-by: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>
Acked-by: Brian Woods <brian.woods@amd.com>
Acked-by: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>
---
 MAINTAINERS | 2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
index bbda4b9f43..e539fac71f 100644
--- a/MAINTAINERS
+++ b/MAINTAINERS
@@ -142,12 +142,14 @@ F:	tools/libacpi/
 
 AMD IOMMU
 M:	Suravee Suthikulpanit <suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com>
+R:	Brian Woods <brian.woods@amd.com>
 S:	Maintained
 F:	xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/
 
 AMD SVM
 M:	Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>
 M:	Suravee Suthikulpanit <suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com>
+R:	Brian Woods <brian.woods@amd.com>
 S:	Supported
 F:	xen/arch/x86/hvm/svm/
 F:	xen/arch/x86/cpu/vpmu_amd.c
-- 
2.13.0


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel

[PATCH for-4.11 v2 2/2] Add Designated Reviewer (R:) to MAINTAINERS file and add support for it in get_maintainer.pl

[Lars Kurth]

The syntax has been copied from the Linux Maintainers file. I moved the following Linux
get_maintainer.pl patches to Xen, fixing up some merge issues (and a bug).

The get_maintainer.pl changes were based on the following git commits
* https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/scripts/get_maintainer.pl?id=
* c1c3f2c906e35bcb6e4cdf5b8e077660fead14fe
* 4f07510df2e8c47fd65b8ffaaf6c5d334d59d598

I also removed code related to
  P: Person (obsolete)
which is in the Linux MAINTAINER's file, but not ours. I may not have
caught all instances though.

I have tested on a number of files using mock entries in MAINTAINERS
using ./scripts/get_maintainer.pl -f ...

I also tested --nor to disable the support and it worked as expected.

Cc: Lars Kurth <lars.kurth@citrix.com>
Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
Cc: George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com>
Cc: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>
Cc: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
Cc: Julien Grall <julien.grall@arm.com>
Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
Cc: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>
Cc: Tim Deegan <tim@xen.org>
Cc: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>
Cc: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Lars Kurth <lars.kurth@citrix.com>

Release-acked-by: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>
Acked-by: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>
---
 MAINTAINERS               |  2 ++
 scripts/get_maintainer.pl | 24 +++++++++++-------------
 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
index e539fac71f..fab76b0af4 100644
--- a/MAINTAINERS
+++ b/MAINTAINERS
@@ -60,6 +60,8 @@ appropriate branch.
 Descriptions of section entries:
 
 	M: Mail patches to: FullName <address@domain>
+	R: Designated reviewer: FullName <address@domain>
+	   These reviewers should be CCed on patches.
 	L: Mailing list that is relevant to this area
 	W: Web-page with status/info
 	T: SCM tree type and location.  Type is one of: git, hg, quilt, stgit.
diff --git a/scripts/get_maintainer.pl b/scripts/get_maintainer.pl
index 3fb1ad4b69..d528da738c 100755
--- a/scripts/get_maintainer.pl
+++ b/scripts/get_maintainer.pl
@@ -21,6 +21,7 @@ my $xen_path = "./";
 my $email = 1;
 my $email_usename = 1;
 my $email_maintainer = 1;
+my $email_reviewer = 1;
 my $email_list = 1;
 my $email_subscriber_list = 0;
 my $email_git_penguin_chiefs = 0;
@@ -199,6 +200,7 @@ if (!GetOptions(
 		'mailmap!' => \$email_use_mailmap,
 		'drop_the_rest_supporter!' => \$email_drop_the_rest_supporter_if_supporter_found,
 		'm!' => \$email_maintainer,
+		'r!' => \$email_reviewer,
 		'n!' => \$email_usename,
 		'l!' => \$email_list,
 		's!' => \$email_subscriber_list,
@@ -257,7 +259,8 @@ if ($sections) {
 }
 
 if ($email &&
-    ($email_maintainer + $email_list + $email_subscriber_list +
+    ($email_maintainer + $email_reviewer +
+     $email_list + $email_subscriber_list +
      $email_git + $email_git_penguin_chiefs + $email_git_blame) == 0) {
     die "$P: Please select at least 1 email option\n";
 }
@@ -791,6 +794,7 @@ MAINTAINER field selection options:
     --hg-since => hg history to use (default: $email_hg_since)
     --interactive => display a menu (mostly useful if used with the --git option)
     --m => include maintainer(s) if any
+    --r => include reviewer(s) if any
     --n => include name 'Full Name <addr\@domain.tld>'
     --l => include list(s) if any
     --s => include subscriber only list(s) if any
@@ -817,7 +821,7 @@ Other options:
   --help => show this help information
 
 Default options:
-  [--email --nogit --git-fallback --m --n --l --multiline -pattern-depth=0
+  [--email --nogit --git-fallback --m --r --n --l --multiline -pattern-depth=0
    --remove-duplicates --rolestats]
 
 Notes:
@@ -1080,21 +1084,15 @@ sub add_categories {
 		}
 	    } elsif ($ptype eq "M") {
 		my ($name, $address) = parse_email($pvalue);
-		if ($name eq "") {
-		    if ($i > 0) {
-			my $tv = $typevalue[$i - 1];
-			if ($tv =~ m/^([A-Z]):\s*(.*)/) {
-			    if ($1 eq "P") {
-				$name = $2;
-				$pvalue = format_email($name, $address, $email_usename);
-			    }
-			}
-		    }
-		}
 		if ($email_maintainer) {
 		    my $role = get_maintainer_role($i);
 		    push_email_addresses($pvalue, $role);
 		}
+	    } elsif ($ptype eq "R") {
+		my ($name, $address) = parse_email($pvalue);
+		if ($email_reviewer) {
+		    push_email_addresses($pvalue, 'reviewer');
+		}
 	    } elsif ($ptype eq "T") {
 		push(@scm, $pvalue);
 	    } elsif ($ptype eq "W") {
-- 
2.13.0


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel

Re: [PATCH for-4.11 v2 0/2] Add Designated Reviewer (R:) to MAINTAINERS (plus a test case)

[Jan Beulich]

>>> On 27.04.18 at 20:01, <lars.kurth@citrix.com> wrote:
> This follows up from a conversation after the April x86 community call, in 
> which I had
> the following action: Lars to propose fixing CC issue in xen.git:MAINTAINERS 
> copying 
> the R section entries from Linux.git:MAINTAINERS (will need changes to 
> get_maintainers.pl also)
> 
> On 27/4/18 Juergen gave a RAB via IRC
> 
> Cc: Lars Kurth <lars.kurth@citrix.com>
> Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
> Cc: George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com>
> Cc: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>
> Cc: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
> Cc: Julien Grall <julien.grall@arm.com>
> Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
> Cc: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>
> Cc: Tim Deegan <tim@xen.org>
> Cc: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>
> Cc: Brian Woods <brian.woods@amd.com>
> Cc: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>
> 
> Release-acked-by: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>
> Acked-by: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>
> 
> Lars Kurth (2):
>   Add Brian Woods as Designated reviewer to AMD IOMMU and AMD SVM
>   Add Designated Reviewer (R:) to MAINTAINERS file and add support for
>     it in get_maintainer.pl

The order of the patches has been unexpectedly swapped, and seems wrong to
me now; granted this is only cosmetic if both go in at the same time.

Jan



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel

Re: [PATCH for-4.11 v2 0/2] Add Designated Reviewer (R:) to MAINTAINERS (plus a test case)

[Lars Kurth]

On 30/04/2018, 08:57, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:

    >>> On 27.04.18 at 20:01, <lars.kurth@citrix.com> wrote:
    > This follows up from a conversation after the April x86 community call, in 
    > which I had
    > the following action: Lars to propose fixing CC issue in xen.git:MAINTAINERS 
    > copying 
    > the R section entries from Linux.git:MAINTAINERS (will need changes to 
    > get_maintainers.pl also)
    > 
    > On 27/4/18 Juergen gave a RAB via IRC
    > 
    > Cc: Lars Kurth <lars.kurth@citrix.com>
    > Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
    > Cc: George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com>
    > Cc: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>
    > Cc: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
    > Cc: Julien Grall <julien.grall@arm.com>
    > Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
    > Cc: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>
    > Cc: Tim Deegan <tim@xen.org>
    > Cc: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>
    > Cc: Brian Woods <brian.woods@amd.com>
    > Cc: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>
    > 
    > Release-acked-by: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>
    > Acked-by: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>
    > 
    > Lars Kurth (2):
    >   Add Brian Woods as Designated reviewer to AMD IOMMU and AMD SVM
    >   Add Designated Reviewer (R:) to MAINTAINERS file and add support for
    >     it in get_maintainer.pl
    
    The order of the patches has been unexpectedly swapped, and seems wrong to
    me now; granted this is only cosmetic if both go in at the same time.
    
That is my fault: I got into trouble with git and must have done something wrong. If it helps, I can switch the order and re-send. 

The first patch "Add Brian Woods..." depends on syntax and tools support introduced by "Add Designated Reviewer (R:)...". I would say that they probably should go in together.

Lars     
    

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel

Re: [PATCH for-4.11 v2 0/2] Add Designated Reviewer (R:) to MAINTAINERS (plus a test case)

[Jan Beulich]

>>> On 30.04.18 at 10:21, <lars.kurth@citrix.com> wrote:

> 
> On 30/04/2018, 08:57, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:
> 
>     >>> On 27.04.18 at 20:01, <lars.kurth@citrix.com> wrote:
>     > This follows up from a conversation after the April x86 community call, 
> in 
>     > which I had
>     > the following action: Lars to propose fixing CC issue in 
> xen.git:MAINTAINERS 
>     > copying 
>     > the R section entries from Linux.git:MAINTAINERS (will need changes to 
>     > get_maintainers.pl also)
>     > 
>     > On 27/4/18 Juergen gave a RAB via IRC
>     > 
>     > Cc: Lars Kurth <lars.kurth@citrix.com>
>     > Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
>     > Cc: George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com>
>     > Cc: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>
>     > Cc: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
>     > Cc: Julien Grall <julien.grall@arm.com>
>     > Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
>     > Cc: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>
>     > Cc: Tim Deegan <tim@xen.org>
>     > Cc: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>
>     > Cc: Brian Woods <brian.woods@amd.com>
>     > Cc: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>
>     > 
>     > Release-acked-by: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>
>     > Acked-by: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>
>     > 
>     > Lars Kurth (2):
>     >   Add Brian Woods as Designated reviewer to AMD IOMMU and AMD SVM
>     >   Add Designated Reviewer (R:) to MAINTAINERS file and add support for
>     >     it in get_maintainer.pl
>     
>     The order of the patches has been unexpectedly swapped, and seems wrong to
>     me now; granted this is only cosmetic if both go in at the same time.
>     
> That is my fault: I got into trouble with git and must have done something 
> wrong. If it helps, I can switch the order and re-send. 

I don't think that's necessary - whoever ends up committing them can easily
enough switch them around. I would commit them right away, if only I was
really clear whether we've all settled on this.

Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel

Re: [PATCH for-4.11 v2 0/2] Add Designated Reviewer (R:) to MAINTAINERS (plus a test case)

[Ian Jackson]

Jan Beulich writes ("Re: [PATCH for-4.11 v2 0/2] Add Designated Reviewer (R:) to MAINTAINERS (plus a test case)"):
> On 30.04.18 at 10:21, <lars.kurth@citrix.com> wrote:
> > On 30/04/2018, 08:57, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:
...
> > That is my fault: I got into trouble with git and must have done something 
> > wrong. If it helps, I can switch the order and re-send. 
> 
> I don't think that's necessary - whoever ends up committing them can easily
> enough switch them around.

I will do so when all is clear.

> I would commit them right away, if only I was
> really clear whether we've all settled on this.

I have been following this.  I think this is a good idea.

Basically it is a way for someone to declare an interest in an area of
code, and get copied on changes, without having to grant that person
any formal decisionmaking authority.

If this is not sufficiently clear, do you think we should document
this more clearly ?  Perhaps we could write:

  +	R: Designated reviewer: FullName <address@domain>
  +        Reviewers should be CCed on patches.  However, they do not
  +        have a formal governance role, and are listed here
  +        simply because of their own request.

or something ?

Ian.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel

Re: [PATCH for-4.11 v2 0/2] Add Designated Reviewer (R:) to MAINTAINERS (plus a test case)

[Lars Kurth]

On 30/04/2018, 14:23, "Ian Jackson" <ian.jackson@citrix.com> wrote:

    Jan Beulich writes ("Re: [PATCH for-4.11 v2 0/2] Add Designated Reviewer (R:) to MAINTAINERS (plus a test case)"):
    > On 30.04.18 at 10:21, <lars.kurth@citrix.com> wrote:
    > > On 30/04/2018, 08:57, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:
    ...
    > > That is my fault: I got into trouble with git and must have done something 
    > > wrong. If it helps, I can switch the order and re-send. 
    > 
    > I don't think that's necessary - whoever ends up committing them can easily
    > enough switch them around.
    
    I will do so when all is clear.
    
    > I would commit them right away, if only I was
    > really clear whether we've all settled on this.
    
    I have been following this.  I think this is a good idea.
    
    Basically it is a way for someone to declare an interest in an area of
    code, and get copied on changes, without having to grant that person
    any formal decisionmaking authority.
    
    If this is not sufficiently clear, do you think we should document
    this more clearly ?  Perhaps we could write:
    
      +	R: Designated reviewer: FullName <address@domain>
      +        Reviewers should be CCed on patches.  However, they do not
      +        have a formal governance role, and are listed here
      +        simply because of their own request.
    
    or something ?

That is clearer: I copied the text from the Linux maintainers file. 
@Jan: let me know whether you want me to re-roll the series with the text change.

Lars
    

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel

Re: [PATCH for-4.11 v2 0/2] Add Designated Reviewer (R:) to MAINTAINERS (plus a test case)

[Jan Beulich]

>>> On 30.04.18 at 15:29, <lars.kurth@citrix.com> wrote:

> 
> On 30/04/2018, 14:23, "Ian Jackson" <ian.jackson@citrix.com> wrote:
> 
>     Jan Beulich writes ("Re: [PATCH for-4.11 v2 0/2] Add Designated Reviewer 
> (R:) to MAINTAINERS (plus a test case)"):
>     > On 30.04.18 at 10:21, <lars.kurth@citrix.com> wrote:
>     > > On 30/04/2018, 08:57, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:
>     ...
>     > > That is my fault: I got into trouble with git and must have done 
> something 
>     > > wrong. If it helps, I can switch the order and re-send. 
>     > 
>     > I don't think that's necessary - whoever ends up committing them can 
> easily
>     > enough switch them around.
>     
>     I will do so when all is clear.
>     
>     > I would commit them right away, if only I was
>     > really clear whether we've all settled on this.
>     
>     I have been following this.  I think this is a good idea.
>     
>     Basically it is a way for someone to declare an interest in an area of
>     code, and get copied on changes, without having to grant that person
>     any formal decisionmaking authority.
>     
>     If this is not sufficiently clear, do you think we should document
>     this more clearly ?  Perhaps we could write:
>     
>       +	R: Designated reviewer: FullName <address@domain>
>       +        Reviewers should be CCed on patches.  However, they do not
>       +        have a formal governance role, and are listed here
>       +        simply because of their own request.
>     
>     or something ?
> 
> That is clearer: I copied the text from the Linux maintainers file. 

Ah, indeed. So far it wasn't really clear to me whether "designated" implies
further privilege.

> @Jan: let me know whether you want me to re-roll the series with the text 
> change.

Since I take Ian's reply as him volunteering to commit both, that would then
really be up to him.

Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel

Re: [PATCH for-4.11 v2 0/2] Add Designated Reviewer (R:) to MAINTAINERS (plus a test case)

[Ian Jackson]

Jan Beulich writes ("Re: [PATCH for-4.11 v2 0/2] Add Designated Reviewer (R:) to MAINTAINERS (plus a test case)"):
> On 30.04.18 at 15:29, <lars.kurth@citrix.com> wrote:
> > That is clearer: I copied the text from the Linux maintainers file. 
> 
> Ah, indeed. So far it wasn't really clear to me whether "designated" implies
> further privilege.

Right.  It does have such a connotation.  Hence my suggestion.
I take it that you are happy with this patch pair now.

> > @Jan: let me know whether you want me to re-roll the series with the text 
> > change.
> 
> Since I take Ian's reply as him volunteering to commit both, that would then
> really be up to him.

Well, I wouldn't want to just commit willy-nilly something that you
had unresolved questions about.  But I think we are all content now,
so, yes, Lars, please respin the two patches with that text.  In the
right order please :-).

Thanks,
Ia.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel

Re: [PATCH for-4.11 v2 0/2] Add Designated Reviewer (R:) to MAINTAINERS (plus a test case)

[Jan Beulich]

>>> On 30.04.18 at 16:41, <ian.jackson@citrix.com> wrote:
> Jan Beulich writes ("Re: [PATCH for-4.11 v2 0/2] Add Designated Reviewer (R:) 
> to MAINTAINERS (plus a test case)"):
>> On 30.04.18 at 15:29, <lars.kurth@citrix.com> wrote:
>> > That is clearer: I copied the text from the Linux maintainers file. 
>> 
>> Ah, indeed. So far it wasn't really clear to me whether "designated" implies
>> further privilege.
> 
> Right.  It does have such a connotation.  Hence my suggestion.
> I take it that you are happy with this patch pair now.

Yes.

Jan



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel

Re: [PATCH for-4.11 v2 0/2] Add Designated Reviewer (R:) to MAINTAINERS (plus a test case)

[George Dunlap]

On 04/30/2018 02:23 PM, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Jan Beulich writes ("Re: [PATCH for-4.11 v2 0/2] Add Designated Reviewer (R:) to MAINTAINERS (plus a test case)"):
>> On 30.04.18 at 10:21, <lars.kurth@citrix.com> wrote:
>>> On 30/04/2018, 08:57, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:
> ...
>>> That is my fault: I got into trouble with git and must have done something 
>>> wrong. If it helps, I can switch the order and re-send. 
>>
>> I don't think that's necessary - whoever ends up committing them can easily
>> enough switch them around.
> 
> I will do so when all is clear.
> 
>> I would commit them right away, if only I was
>> really clear whether we've all settled on this.
> 
> I have been following this.  I think this is a good idea.
> 
> Basically it is a way for someone to declare an interest in an area of
> code, and get copied on changes, without having to grant that person
> any formal decisionmaking authority.
> 
> If this is not sufficiently clear, do you think we should document
> this more clearly ?  Perhaps we could write:
> 
>   +	R: Designated reviewer: FullName <address@domain>
>   +        Reviewers should be CCed on patches.  However, they do not
>   +        have a formal governance role, and are listed here
>   +        simply because of their own request.
> 
> or something ?

+1 to this description; but I took Jan to mean that it wasn't clear
whether we as a community had decided having such a framework was a good
one (although it sounded like he was personally in favor).

Lazy consensus says that if people don't object, it's assumed that
they're OK with it.  The first version of this series was posted 25
April; if people are concerned about giving people a chance to object,
we could wait until 2 May to check it in.  That would give people a week
in which to object if they want.

I wouldn't object to someone checking it in now, however; I think all
the committers have had a chance to object, and most have expressed support.

 -George

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel

Re: [PATCH for-4.11 v2 0/2] Add Designated Reviewer (R:) to MAINTAINERS (plus a test case)

[George Dunlap]

On 04/30/2018 02:23 PM, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Jan Beulich writes ("Re: [PATCH for-4.11 v2 0/2] Add Designated Reviewer (R:) to MAINTAINERS (plus a test case)"):
>> On 30.04.18 at 10:21, <lars.kurth@citrix.com> wrote:
>>> On 30/04/2018, 08:57, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:
> ...
>>> That is my fault: I got into trouble with git and must have done something 
>>> wrong. If it helps, I can switch the order and re-send. 
>>
>> I don't think that's necessary - whoever ends up committing them can easily
>> enough switch them around.
> 
> I will do so when all is clear.
> 
>> I would commit them right away, if only I was
>> really clear whether we've all settled on this.
> 
> I have been following this.  I think this is a good idea.
> 
> Basically it is a way for someone to declare an interest in an area of
> code, and get copied on changes, without having to grant that person
> any formal decisionmaking authority.
> 
> If this is not sufficiently clear, do you think we should document
> this more clearly ?  Perhaps we could write:
> 
>   +	R: Designated reviewer: FullName <address@domain>
>   +        Reviewers should be CCed on patches.  However, they do not
>   +        have a formal governance role, and are listed here
>   +        simply because of their own request.
> 
> or something ?

+1 to this description; but I took Jan to mean that it wasn't clear
whether we as a community had decided having such a framework was a good
one (although it sounded like he was personally in favor).

Lazy consensus says that if people don't object, it's assumed that
they're OK with it.  The first version of this series was posted 25
April; if people are concerned about giving people a chance to object,
we could wait until 2 May to check it in.  That would give people a week
in which to object if they want.

I wouldn't object to someone checking it in now, however; I think all
the committers have had a chance to object, and most have expressed support.

 -George

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel

Re: [PATCH for-4.11 v2 0/2] Add Designated Reviewer (R:) to MAINTAINERS (plus a test case)

[Lars Kurth]

On 30/04/2018, 14:39, "George Dunlap" <george.dunlap@citrix.com> wrote:

    On 04/30/2018 02:23 PM, Ian Jackson wrote:
    > Jan Beulich writes ("Re: [PATCH for-4.11 v2 0/2] Add Designated Reviewer (R:) to MAINTAINERS (plus a test case)"):
    >> On 30.04.18 at 10:21, <lars.kurth@citrix.com> wrote:
    >>> On 30/04/2018, 08:57, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:
    > ...
    >>> That is my fault: I got into trouble with git and must have done something 
    >>> wrong. If it helps, I can switch the order and re-send. 
    >>
    >> I don't think that's necessary - whoever ends up committing them can easily
    >> enough switch them around.
    > 
    > I will do so when all is clear.
    > 
    >> I would commit them right away, if only I was
    >> really clear whether we've all settled on this.
    > 
    > I have been following this.  I think this is a good idea.
    > 
    > Basically it is a way for someone to declare an interest in an area of
    > code, and get copied on changes, without having to grant that person
    > any formal decisionmaking authority.
    > 
    > If this is not sufficiently clear, do you think we should document
    > this more clearly ?  Perhaps we could write:
    > 
    >   +	R: Designated reviewer: FullName <address@domain>
    >   +        Reviewers should be CCed on patches.  However, they do not
    >   +        have a formal governance role, and are listed here
    >   +        simply because of their own request.
    > 
    > or something ?
    
    +1 to this description; but I took Jan to mean that it wasn't clear
    whether we as a community had decided having such a framework was a good
    one (although it sounded like he was personally in favor).
    
    Lazy consensus says that if people don't object, it's assumed that
    they're OK with it.  The first version of this series was posted 25
    April; if people are concerned about giving people a chance to object,
    we could wait until 2 May to check it in.  That would give people a week
    in which to object if they want.
    
    I wouldn't object to someone checking it in now, however; I think all
    the committers have had a chance to object, and most have expressed support.

Agreed. And it was discussed at the x86 community call, which is why I put the patch together

Lars
 

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel

Re: [PATCH for-4.11 v2 0/2] Add Designated Reviewer (R:) to MAINTAINERS (plus a test case)

[Ian Jackson]

Lars Kurth writes ("Re: [PATCH for-4.11 v2 0/2] Add Designated Reviewer (R:) to MAINTAINERS (plus a test case)"):
> On 30/04/2018, 14:39, "George Dunlap" <george.dunlap@citrix.com> wrote:
>
>     I wouldn't object to someone checking it in now, however; I think all
>     the committers have had a chance to object, and most have expressed support.
> 
> Agreed. And it was discussed at the x86 community call, which is why I put the patch together

I'm sure that the x86 community call is very useful and as you can
tell I support this proposal, but the x86 community call cannot make
decisions about what should be committed.

Ian.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel