qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] Unclear committer situation


From: Aurelien Jarno
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Unclear committer situation
Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2009 09:46:16 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)

On Wed, Dec 02, 2009 at 09:37:16AM +0100, Alexander Graf wrote:
> 
> On 02.12.2009, at 09:26, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Dec 01, 2009 at 12:47:36PM +0100, Alexander Graf wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >> 
> >> Could someone with commit rights please stand up to feel responsible for 
> >> PPC?
> >> 
> >> Usually, when I send a patch to qemu-devel, I know who to address to  
> >> increase chances of it getting committed. For kvm/vnc/block I just CC  
> >> Anthony, for Audio I just CC malc, etc.
> >> 
> >> There are some subsystems where nobody feels responsible though,  
> >> apparently hoping 'someone else' will tske on it. Well, turns out it  
> >> doesn't work that way.
> >> 
> >> So could we please assign a committer for every subsystem around? Even  
> >> if the committer doesn't know the architecture inside out, it's still  
> >> valuable to have soneone feel responsible at all. Committer and  
> >> maintainer also don't have to be the same person. I'll gladly maintain  
> >> S390 without having commit rights - as long as I have someone to CC and 
> >> know the patches will get merged.
> >> 
> > 
> > I also try to follow the ppc architecture, though less than mips and
> > also depending on my free time. I know that Blue Swirl and Malc also
> > care about it.
> 
> Right - which makes it pretty hard. IMHO it's always best to have a single 
> person to talk to when it comes to committing and others who comment on 
> patches.

Some committers are not available for a long period of time. It also
happens to me.

> In fact, I even believe that the person committing stuff doesn't have to know 
> the stuff he commits. If I make a patch that breaks S390 and someone commits 
> it, it's my fault breaking it - not the committer's. If I do a patch breaking 
> PPC KVM, it's my fault breaking it, not the committer's. And with fault I 
> also mean "responsibility to fix".

Experience has shown that it doesn't work like that. It happens the
person writing the patches never provides a fix, and the committer
receives the complains, and in fine fixes the commit.

> > It's not impossible that I miss patches given the current patches rate
> > on the mailing list, so don't hesitate to Cc: me. On the other hand, I
> > don't really feel comfortable with KVM related patches, I would prefer
> > to see them committed by Anthony.
> 
> Avi, can I get PPC KVM patches in through you then? I guess you're the 
> closest person to the code in question.
> 

If you an get your patches acked-by Avi, I am fine merging them.

-- 
Aurelien Jarno                          GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73
address@hidden                 http://www.aurel32.net




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]