There is no active maintainer, but since Peter is picking up
patches via qemu-arm@nongnu.org, I think we could at least use
"Odd Fixes" as status here.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>
---
MAINTAINERS | 6 ++++++
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
index 0499e11..471cf72 100644
--- a/MAINTAINERS
+++ b/MAINTAINERS
@@ -592,6 +592,12 @@ F: hw/*/pxa2xx*
F: hw/misc/mst_fpga.c
F: include/hw/arm/pxa.h
+Sharp SL-5500 (Collie) PDA
+L: qemu-arm@nongnu.org
+S: Odd Fixes
+F: hw/arm/collie.c
+F: hw/arm/strongarm*
+
Stellaris
M: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
L: qemu-arm@nongnu.org
--
1.8.3.1
On 6/11/18 19:17, Thomas Huth wrote: > There is no active maintainer, but since Peter is picking up > patches via qemu-arm@nongnu.org, I think we could at least use > "Odd Fixes" as status here. This looks more as "Orphan" to me... Regardless the one choosed: Reviewed-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@redhat.com> > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> > --- > MAINTAINERS | 6 ++++++ > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS > index 0499e11..471cf72 100644 > --- a/MAINTAINERS > +++ b/MAINTAINERS > @@ -592,6 +592,12 @@ F: hw/*/pxa2xx* > F: hw/misc/mst_fpga.c > F: include/hw/arm/pxa.h > > +Sharp SL-5500 (Collie) PDA > +L: qemu-arm@nongnu.org > +S: Odd Fixes > +F: hw/arm/collie.c > +F: hw/arm/strongarm* > + > Stellaris > M: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> > L: qemu-arm@nongnu.org >
On 2018-11-06 19:49, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: > On 6/11/18 19:17, Thomas Huth wrote: >> There is no active maintainer, but since Peter is picking up >> patches via qemu-arm@nongnu.org, I think we could at least use >> "Odd Fixes" as status here. > > This looks more as "Orphan" to me... I'll leave it up to Peter for the final decision... > Regardless the one choosed: > Reviewed-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@redhat.com> Thanks, Thomas
On 6 November 2018 at 18:52, Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> wrote: > On 2018-11-06 19:49, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: >> On 6/11/18 19:17, Thomas Huth wrote: >>> There is no active maintainer, but since Peter is picking up >>> patches via qemu-arm@nongnu.org, I think we could at least use >>> "Odd Fixes" as status here. >> >> This looks more as "Orphan" to me... > > I'll leave it up to Peter for the final decision... I think we're not very consistent[*] in our usage of the various statuses in the MAINTAINERS file. I guess "Odd Fixes" makes sense in that, well, if you send a patch to this code and cc me I'll review it and put it in the tree. (This is true of any of the arm boards we have.) [*] We have one thing tagged Orphan, which is bsd-user/, and some things tagged Odd Fixes with no listed maintainer, and some things tagged Odd Fixes which are in practice more like Orphan (for instance sh4), and we list "fpu/" as Odd Fixes despite having given it a pretty thorough overhaul very recently, and so on... If you wanted a mechanizable rule, you could try something like "every file which is in status Odd Fixes or better must list with M: at least one named individual who has submitted a pull request in the last nine months" :-) thanks -- PMM
Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> writes: > On 6 November 2018 at 18:52, Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> wrote: >> On 2018-11-06 19:49, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: >>> On 6/11/18 19:17, Thomas Huth wrote: >>>> There is no active maintainer, but since Peter is picking up >>>> patches via qemu-arm@nongnu.org, I think we could at least use >>>> "Odd Fixes" as status here. >>> >>> This looks more as "Orphan" to me... >> >> I'll leave it up to Peter for the final decision... > > I think we're not very consistent[*] in our usage of the various > statuses in the MAINTAINERS file. I guess "Odd Fixes" makes > sense in that, well, if you send a patch to this > code and cc me I'll review it and put it in the tree. (This > is true of any of the arm boards we have.) > > [*] We have one thing tagged Orphan, which is bsd-user/, > and some things tagged Odd Fixes with no listed maintainer, > and some things tagged Odd Fixes which are in practice more > like Orphan (for instance sh4), and we list "fpu/" as > Odd Fixes despite having given it a pretty thorough > overhaul very recently, and so on... > > If you wanted a mechanizable rule, you could try something > like "every file which is in status Odd Fixes or better > must list with M: at least one named individual who has > submitted a pull request in the last nine months" :-) Sounds like an excellent idea to me!
On 2018-11-07 17:08, Markus Armbruster wrote: > Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> writes: > >> On 6 November 2018 at 18:52, Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> wrote: >>> On 2018-11-06 19:49, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: >>>> On 6/11/18 19:17, Thomas Huth wrote: >>>>> There is no active maintainer, but since Peter is picking up >>>>> patches via qemu-arm@nongnu.org, I think we could at least use >>>>> "Odd Fixes" as status here. >>>> >>>> This looks more as "Orphan" to me... >>> >>> I'll leave it up to Peter for the final decision... >> >> I think we're not very consistent[*] in our usage of the various >> statuses in the MAINTAINERS file. I guess "Odd Fixes" makes >> sense in that, well, if you send a patch to this >> code and cc me I'll review it and put it in the tree. (This >> is true of any of the arm boards we have.) >> >> [*] We have one thing tagged Orphan, which is bsd-user/, >> and some things tagged Odd Fixes with no listed maintainer, >> and some things tagged Odd Fixes which are in practice more >> like Orphan (for instance sh4), and we list "fpu/" as >> Odd Fixes despite having given it a pretty thorough >> overhaul very recently, and so on... >> >> If you wanted a mechanizable rule, you could try something >> like "every file which is in status Odd Fixes or better >> must list with M: at least one named individual who has >> submitted a pull request in the last nine months" :-) > > Sounds like an excellent idea to me! Well, for me "odd fixes" means that there is someone around who might pick up the patch and throw it into a PULL request. "Orphan" means it's mostly in vain to send patches for this subsystem, since there is nobody going to pick up your patch. So for the ARM boards, I'd say that "odd fixes" is a better choice, since Peter still picks up most of the patches via the "L: qemu-arm@nongnu.org" (big thanks for this, by the way!). Thomas
On 7 November 2018 at 19:39, Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> wrote: > On 2018-11-07 17:08, Markus Armbruster wrote: >> Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> writes: >> >>> On 6 November 2018 at 18:52, Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> wrote: >>>> On 2018-11-06 19:49, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: >>>>> On 6/11/18 19:17, Thomas Huth wrote: >>>>>> There is no active maintainer, but since Peter is picking up >>>>>> patches via qemu-arm@nongnu.org, I think we could at least use >>>>>> "Odd Fixes" as status here. >>>>> >>>>> This looks more as "Orphan" to me... >>>> >>>> I'll leave it up to Peter for the final decision... >>> >>> I think we're not very consistent[*] in our usage of the various >>> statuses in the MAINTAINERS file. I guess "Odd Fixes" makes >>> sense in that, well, if you send a patch to this >>> code and cc me I'll review it and put it in the tree. (This >>> is true of any of the arm boards we have.) >>> >>> [*] We have one thing tagged Orphan, which is bsd-user/, >>> and some things tagged Odd Fixes with no listed maintainer, >>> and some things tagged Odd Fixes which are in practice more >>> like Orphan (for instance sh4), and we list "fpu/" as >>> Odd Fixes despite having given it a pretty thorough >>> overhaul very recently, and so on... >>> >>> If you wanted a mechanizable rule, you could try something >>> like "every file which is in status Odd Fixes or better >>> must list with M: at least one named individual who has >>> submitted a pull request in the last nine months" :-) >> >> Sounds like an excellent idea to me! > > Well, for me "odd fixes" means that there is someone around who might > pick up the patch and throw it into a PULL request. "Orphan" means it's > mostly in vain to send patches for this subsystem, since there is nobody > going to pick up your patch. So for the ARM boards, I'd say that "odd > fixes" is a better choice, since Peter still picks up most of the > patches via the "L: qemu-arm@nongnu.org" (big thanks for this, by the way!). I think there should be a named person, though. A list isn't a maintainer (at least not for the big whole subsystem lists we have). thanks -- PMM
Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> writes: > On 7 November 2018 at 19:39, Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> wrote: >> On 2018-11-07 17:08, Markus Armbruster wrote: >>> Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> writes: >>> >>>> On 6 November 2018 at 18:52, Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> wrote: >>>>> On 2018-11-06 19:49, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: >>>>>> On 6/11/18 19:17, Thomas Huth wrote: >>>>>>> There is no active maintainer, but since Peter is picking up >>>>>>> patches via qemu-arm@nongnu.org, I think we could at least use >>>>>>> "Odd Fixes" as status here. >>>>>> >>>>>> This looks more as "Orphan" to me... >>>>> >>>>> I'll leave it up to Peter for the final decision... >>>> >>>> I think we're not very consistent[*] in our usage of the various >>>> statuses in the MAINTAINERS file. I guess "Odd Fixes" makes >>>> sense in that, well, if you send a patch to this >>>> code and cc me I'll review it and put it in the tree. (This >>>> is true of any of the arm boards we have.) >>>> >>>> [*] We have one thing tagged Orphan, which is bsd-user/, >>>> and some things tagged Odd Fixes with no listed maintainer, >>>> and some things tagged Odd Fixes which are in practice more >>>> like Orphan (for instance sh4), and we list "fpu/" as >>>> Odd Fixes despite having given it a pretty thorough >>>> overhaul very recently, and so on... >>>> >>>> If you wanted a mechanizable rule, you could try something >>>> like "every file which is in status Odd Fixes or better >>>> must list with M: at least one named individual who has >>>> submitted a pull request in the last nine months" :-) >>> >>> Sounds like an excellent idea to me! >> >> Well, for me "odd fixes" means that there is someone around who might >> pick up the patch and throw it into a PULL request. That someone should be listed with M:. >> "Orphan" means it's >> mostly in vain to send patches for this subsystem, since there is nobody >> going to pick up your patch. So for the ARM boards, I'd say that "odd >> fixes" is a better choice, since Peter still picks up most of the >> patches via the "L: qemu-arm@nongnu.org" (big thanks for this, by the way!). > > I think there should be a named person, though. A list > isn't a maintainer (at least not for the big whole > subsystem lists we have). Agree.
On 6 November 2018 at 18:17, Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> wrote: > There is no active maintainer, but since Peter is picking up > patches via qemu-arm@nongnu.org, I think we could at least use > "Odd Fixes" as status here. > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> > --- > MAINTAINERS | 6 ++++++ > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS > index 0499e11..471cf72 100644 > --- a/MAINTAINERS > +++ b/MAINTAINERS > @@ -592,6 +592,12 @@ F: hw/*/pxa2xx* > F: hw/misc/mst_fpga.c > F: include/hw/arm/pxa.h > > +Sharp SL-5500 (Collie) PDA > +L: qemu-arm@nongnu.org > +S: Odd Fixes > +F: hw/arm/collie.c > +F: hw/arm/strongarm* > + > Stellaris > M: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> > L: qemu-arm@nongnu.org Applied to target-arm.next with myself added as an M: contact, thanks. -- PMM
© 2016 - 2024 Red Hat, Inc.