Re: Status of Subsystems
From: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
Date: Wed Aug 21 2019 - 08:10:23 EST
On 20.08.19 19:15, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
There are some files which have no official
owner, and there are also some files which may be modified by more
than one subsystem.
hmm, wouldn't it be better to alway have explicit maintainers ?
I recall some discussion few weeks ago on some of my patches, where it
turned out that amm acts as fallback for a lot of code that doesn't have
@Sebastian: maybe you could also create reports for quickly identifying
We certainly don't talk about "inheritance" when we talk about
maintainers and sub-maintainers.
What's the exact definition of the term "sub-maintainer" ?
Somebody who's maintaining some defined part of something bigger
(eg. a driver within some subsystem, some platform within some
arch, etc) or kinda deputee maintainer ?
Furthermore, the relationships,
processes, and workflows between a particular maintainer and their
submaintainers can be unique to a particular maintainer.
Can we somehow find some (semi-formal) description for those
relationships and workflows, so it's easier to learn about them
when some is new to some particular area ?
(I'd volounteer maintaining such documentation, if the individual
maintainers feed me the necessary information ;-)).
Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
Free software and Linux embedded engineering
info@xxxxxxxxx -- +49-151-27565287