Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: Add DornerWorks maintainers email

[Stewart Hildebrand <Stewart.Hildebrand@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thursday, October 24, 2019 9:37 AM, Julien Grall wrote:
>Hi,
>
>Jumping into the conversation.
>
>On 24/10/2019 14:06, Jeff Kubascik wrote:
>> We would like to remove our current two developers who are listed as M: for 
>> the
>> ARINC653 scheduler code. Since M: is just a "Mail patches to" designation, 
>> I'm
>> now leaning towards the L: designation, as the two appear roughly equivalent 
>> in
>> their role. Does that sound reasonable?
>
>I don't think you can treat "L:" and "M:" the same way.
>
>"M:" is a single person that we know.
>
>"L:" is a list of person that we don't know.
>
>xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx definitely falls into the "L:" category. That clearly
>raises a few questions here.
>
>        - How do we know when the list of person change?
>        - How acked-by/reviewed-by will be done? Will it be Acked-by 
> "Dornerworks
><....>"? If not, then we still need "M:" around to which acked-by is 
>sufficient.
>If yes, how do we know all the person on that list can be trusted?

The rationale for removing Robbie and Josh is that they are currently 
active on other projects that don't involve Xen. I'm involved with Xen
and I'm the tech lead for our product that actually uses the ARINC 653
scheduler, so I'll volunteer myself to replace Robbie and Josh. This
way we will still have a real person with an M: for the ARINC 653
scheduler in MANTAINERS.

We would still like to add our internal list. It seems L: is a fairly
agreeable designation for the list.

L:        DornerWorks Xen-Devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

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