Support for Intel TXT has orphaned status right now because
no active maintainter is listed. Adding myself as reviewer
and moving it to Odd Fixes state.
Signed-off-by: Lukasz Hawrylko <lukasz.hawrylko@intel.com>
---
MAINTAINERS | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
index 89a01b710b..ca300e87c8 100644
--- a/MAINTAINERS
+++ b/MAINTAINERS
@@ -240,7 +240,8 @@ S: Maintained
F: tools/golang
INTEL(R) TRUSTED EXECUTION TECHNOLOGY (TXT)
-S: Orphaned
+R: Lukasz Hawrylko <lukasz.hawrylko@intel.com>
+S: Odd Fixes
F: xen/arch/x86/tboot.c
F: xen/include/asm-x86/tboot.h
--
2.20.1
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Intel Technology Poland sp. z o.o.
ul. Slowackiego 173 | 80-298 Gdansk | Sad Rejonowy Gdansk Polnoc | VII Wydzial Gospodarczy Krajowego Rejestru Sadowego - KRS 101882 | NIP 957-07-52-316 | Kapital zakladowy 200.000 PLN.
Ta wiadomosc wraz z zalacznikami jest przeznaczona dla okreslonego adresata i moze zawierac informacje poufne. W razie przypadkowego otrzymania tej wiadomosci, prosimy o powiadomienie nadawcy oraz trwale jej usuniecie; jakiekolwiek
przegladanie lub rozpowszechnianie jest zabronione.
This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies; any review or distribution by
others is strictly prohibited.
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-develOn 30.07.2019 08:56, Lukasz Hawrylko wrote: > Support for Intel TXT has orphaned status right now because > no active maintainter is listed. Adding myself as reviewer > and moving it to Odd Fixes state. > > Signed-off-by: Lukasz Hawrylko <lukasz.hawrylko@intel.com> > --- > MAINTAINERS | 3 ++- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS > index 89a01b710b..ca300e87c8 100644 > --- a/MAINTAINERS > +++ b/MAINTAINERS > @@ -240,7 +240,8 @@ S: Maintained > F: tools/golang > > INTEL(R) TRUSTED EXECUTION TECHNOLOGY (TXT) > -S: Orphaned > +R: Lukasz Hawrylko <lukasz.hawrylko@intel.com> > +S: Odd Fixes I guess we should give it a few days for objections to be raised against this slightly inconsistent state, but I think that's the best way to express the current state of things (hence my suggestion to this effect). If no objections turn up, I've queued this onto my to-be-committed list. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
Hi Jan, On 7/30/19 9:29 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 30.07.2019 08:56, Lukasz Hawrylko wrote: >> Support for Intel TXT has orphaned status right now because >> no active maintainter is listed. Adding myself as reviewer >> and moving it to Odd Fixes state. >> >> Signed-off-by: Lukasz Hawrylko <lukasz.hawrylko@intel.com> >> --- >> MAINTAINERS | 3 ++- >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS >> index 89a01b710b..ca300e87c8 100644 >> --- a/MAINTAINERS >> +++ b/MAINTAINERS >> @@ -240,7 +240,8 @@ S: Maintained >> F: tools/golang >> >> INTEL(R) TRUSTED EXECUTION TECHNOLOGY (TXT) >> -S: Orphaned >> +R: Lukasz Hawrylko <lukasz.hawrylko@intel.com> >> +S: Odd Fixes > > I guess we should give it a few days for objections to be raised > against this slightly inconsistent state, but I think that's the > best way to express the current state of things (hence my > suggestion to this effect). If no objections turn up, I've queued > this onto my to-be-committed list. I have some objections regarding the process itself... On the first version of this patch, it was pointed out that the e-mail shouldn't be sent with disclaimer. This is now the third version and the disclaimer is still present. Technically, no patch should be applied when there are a disclaimer. While I would have been happy to disregard it if it were the first version, I think Lukasz should resend this patch with the disclaimer off. This will give him an opportunity to correctly configure his e-mail client for future communication on the list. Cheers, -- Julien Grall _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
On 30.07.2019 10:54, Julien Grall wrote: > On 7/30/19 9:29 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: >> On 30.07.2019 08:56, Lukasz Hawrylko wrote: >>> Support for Intel TXT has orphaned status right now because >>> no active maintainter is listed. Adding myself as reviewer >>> and moving it to Odd Fixes state. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Lukasz Hawrylko <lukasz.hawrylko@intel.com> >>> --- >>> MAINTAINERS | 3 ++- >>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS >>> index 89a01b710b..ca300e87c8 100644 >>> --- a/MAINTAINERS >>> +++ b/MAINTAINERS >>> @@ -240,7 +240,8 @@ S: Maintained >>> F: tools/golang >>> INTEL(R) TRUSTED EXECUTION TECHNOLOGY (TXT) >>> -S: Orphaned >>> +R: Lukasz Hawrylko <lukasz.hawrylko@intel.com> >>> +S: Odd Fixes >> >> I guess we should give it a few days for objections to be raised >> against this slightly inconsistent state, but I think that's the >> best way to express the current state of things (hence my >> suggestion to this effect). If no objections turn up, I've queued >> this onto my to-be-committed list. > > I have some objections regarding the process itself... On the first > version of this patch, it was pointed out that the e-mail shouldn't > be sent with disclaimer. This is now the third version and the > disclaimer is still present. Okay, I must have missed both earlier requests to this effect. I've gone back to the list archives though, and I couldn't find any such request either from July or June. Therefore ... > Technically, no patch should be applied when there are a disclaimer. ... I'd also like to ask for the background of this. It would never have occurred to me that I should pay attention to possible disclaimers or alike on patch submissions. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
Hi Jan, On 30/07/2019 10:05, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 30.07.2019 10:54, Julien Grall wrote: >> On 7/30/19 9:29 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: >>> On 30.07.2019 08:56, Lukasz Hawrylko wrote: >>>> Support for Intel TXT has orphaned status right now because >>>> no active maintainter is listed. Adding myself as reviewer >>>> and moving it to Odd Fixes state. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Lukasz Hawrylko <lukasz.hawrylko@intel.com> >>>> --- >>>> MAINTAINERS | 3 ++- >>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS >>>> index 89a01b710b..ca300e87c8 100644 >>>> --- a/MAINTAINERS >>>> +++ b/MAINTAINERS >>>> @@ -240,7 +240,8 @@ S: Maintained >>>> F: tools/golang >>>> INTEL(R) TRUSTED EXECUTION TECHNOLOGY (TXT) >>>> -S: Orphaned >>>> +R: Lukasz Hawrylko <lukasz.hawrylko@intel.com> >>>> +S: Odd Fixes >>> >>> I guess we should give it a few days for objections to be raised >>> against this slightly inconsistent state, but I think that's the >>> best way to express the current state of things (hence my >>> suggestion to this effect). If no objections turn up, I've queued >>> this onto my to-be-committed list. >> >> I have some objections regarding the process itself... On the first >> version of this patch, it was pointed out that the e-mail shouldn't >> be sent with disclaimer. This is now the third version and the >> disclaimer is still present. > > Okay, I must have missed both earlier requests to this effect. I've > gone back to the list archives though, and I couldn't find any such > request either from July or June. Therefore ... The first version was sent from March [1]. > >> Technically, no patch should be applied when there are a disclaimer. > > ... I'd also like to ask for the background of this. It would never > have occurred to me that I should pay attention to possible > disclaimers or alike on patch submissions. The disclaimer tell you this patch may contain confidential information and you are not allowed to distribute it... While I agree this makes no sense for public ML, we still have to stay on the safe side. How do you know this was not sent by mistake? Note that this question makes little sense on MAINTAINERS file... In general, I am following Greg KH advice here [2] and refrain to answer any e-mail with disclaimer. I would actually advocate xen-devel to completely block those e-mails. Cheers, [1] https://lists.xenproject.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2019-03/msg00729.html [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMeH7wqOwXA&feature=youtu.be&t=13m53s -- Julien Grall _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
On 7/30/19 10:54 AM, Julien Grall wrote: > Hi Jan, > > On 30/07/2019 10:05, Jan Beulich wrote: >> On 30.07.2019 10:54, Julien Grall wrote: >>> On 7/30/19 9:29 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 30.07.2019 08:56, Lukasz Hawrylko wrote: >>>>> Support for Intel TXT has orphaned status right now because >>>>> no active maintainter is listed. Adding myself as reviewer >>>>> and moving it to Odd Fixes state. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Lukasz Hawrylko <lukasz.hawrylko@intel.com> >>>>> --- >>>>> MAINTAINERS | 3 ++- >>>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS >>>>> index 89a01b710b..ca300e87c8 100644 >>>>> --- a/MAINTAINERS >>>>> +++ b/MAINTAINERS >>>>> @@ -240,7 +240,8 @@ S: Maintained >>>>> F: tools/golang >>>>> INTEL(R) TRUSTED EXECUTION TECHNOLOGY (TXT) >>>>> -S: Orphaned >>>>> +R: Lukasz Hawrylko <lukasz.hawrylko@intel.com> >>>>> +S: Odd Fixes >>>> >>>> I guess we should give it a few days for objections to be raised >>>> against this slightly inconsistent state, but I think that's the >>>> best way to express the current state of things (hence my >>>> suggestion to this effect). If no objections turn up, I've queued >>>> this onto my to-be-committed list. >>> >>> I have some objections regarding the process itself... On the first >>> version of this patch, it was pointed out that the e-mail shouldn't >>> be sent with disclaimer. This is now the third version and the >>> disclaimer is still present. >> >> Okay, I must have missed both earlier requests to this effect. I've >> gone back to the list archives though, and I couldn't find any such >> request either from July or June. Therefore ... > > The first version was sent from March [1]. > >> >>> Technically, no patch should be applied when there are a disclaimer. >> >> ... I'd also like to ask for the background of this. It would never >> have occurred to me that I should pay attention to possible >> disclaimers or alike on patch submissions. > > The disclaimer tell you this patch may contain confidential information > and you are not allowed to distribute it... While I agree this makes no > sense for public ML, we still have to stay on the safe side. How do you > know this was not sent by mistake? Note that this question makes little > sense on MAINTAINERS file... > > In general, I am following Greg KH advice here [2] and refrain to answer > any e-mail with disclaimer. I would actually advocate xen-devel to > completely block those e-mails. I think "refraining from answering" and "blocking from the list" is a bit too strong: after all, the disclamer does say "may", and it should be pretty clear that the "intended recipients" includes anyone on xen-devel. But for code itself, which will end up being used in the products of large corporations with deep pockets, I agree should be absolutely clear of legal doubt; as such, having such a disclaimer on the patches should be disallowed. We get lots of patches from Intel folks which don't have the disclaimer at the bottom. Sorry to delay this simple change yet again. -George _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
> On 30 Jul 2019, at 11:08, George Dunlap <george.dunlap@citrix.com> wrote: > > On 7/30/19 10:54 AM, Julien Grall wrote: >> Hi Jan, >> >> On 30/07/2019 10:05, Jan Beulich wrote: >>> On 30.07.2019 10:54, Julien Grall wrote: >>>> On 7/30/19 9:29 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>> On 30.07.2019 08:56, Lukasz Hawrylko wrote: >>>>>> Support for Intel TXT has orphaned status right now because >>>>>> no active maintainter is listed. Adding myself as reviewer >>>>>> and moving it to Odd Fixes state. >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Lukasz Hawrylko <lukasz.hawrylko@intel.com> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> MAINTAINERS | 3 ++- >>>>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>>>>> >>>>>> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS >>>>>> index 89a01b710b..ca300e87c8 100644 >>>>>> --- a/MAINTAINERS >>>>>> +++ b/MAINTAINERS >>>>>> @@ -240,7 +240,8 @@ S: Maintained >>>>>> F: tools/golang >>>>>> INTEL(R) TRUSTED EXECUTION TECHNOLOGY (TXT) >>>>>> -S: Orphaned >>>>>> +R: Lukasz Hawrylko <lukasz.hawrylko@intel.com> >>>>>> +S: Odd Fixes >>>>> >>>>> I guess we should give it a few days for objections to be raised >>>>> against this slightly inconsistent state, but I think that's the >>>>> best way to express the current state of things (hence my >>>>> suggestion to this effect). If no objections turn up, I've queued >>>>> this onto my to-be-committed list. >>>> >>>> I have some objections regarding the process itself... On the first >>>> version of this patch, it was pointed out that the e-mail shouldn't >>>> be sent with disclaimer. This is now the third version and the >>>> disclaimer is still present. >>> >>> Okay, I must have missed both earlier requests to this effect. I've >>> gone back to the list archives though, and I couldn't find any such >>> request either from July or June. Therefore ... >> >> The first version was sent from March [1]. >> >>> >>>> Technically, no patch should be applied when there are a disclaimer. >>> >>> ... I'd also like to ask for the background of this. It would never >>> have occurred to me that I should pay attention to possible >>> disclaimers or alike on patch submissions. >> >> The disclaimer tell you this patch may contain confidential information >> and you are not allowed to distribute it... While I agree this makes no >> sense for public ML, we still have to stay on the safe side. How do you >> know this was not sent by mistake? Note that this question makes little >> sense on MAINTAINERS file... >> >> In general, I am following Greg KH advice here [2] and refrain to answer >> any e-mail with disclaimer. I would actually advocate xen-devel to >> completely block those e-mails. > > I think "refraining from answering" and "blocking from the list" is a > bit too strong: after all, the disclamer does say "may", and it should > be pretty clear that the "intended recipients" includes anyone on xen-devel. > > But for code itself, which will end up being used in the products of > large corporations with deep pockets, I agree should be absolutely clear > of legal doubt; as such, having such a disclaimer on the patches should > be disallowed. We get lots of patches from Intel folks which don't have > the disclaimer at the bottom. > > Sorry to delay this simple change yet again. +full committers list and Juergen OK. We should have a separate discussion related to disclaimers: make a formal decision and afterwards document it in the contribution workflow. I agree that this makes sense, and this has been raised by Julien in the past privately related to questions on xen-devel@. It then turned out that Arm folks from China have consistently used disclaimers on contributions to mini-os and unikraft. This has stopped now, which is to Julien's credit. I suggested than that Julien should raise this issue formally as a policy change, which never happened. I do not believe that we should block any patches from being applied due to disclaimers in absence of an agreed policy. Contributors sign a DCO and that may well override a disclaimer (we do not have access to the legal advice that Greg KH refers to). If there was a serious legal issue, the LF would have contacted all of its projects. And I also could not find any public reference to such an issue. This definitely something where the Advisory Board should have some input. And in particular this patch also contains no code and should not be blocked on these grounds. @Lukasz: please take note of this issue for the next time round. It should be easy enough to disable the disclaimer when sending to certain lists To move forward: * There should be a policy discussion * There should be AB input * The outcome should be documented in https://xenproject.org/help/contribution-guidelines/ <https://xenproject.org/help/contribution-guidelines/> and the git contribution workflow Lars _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
Hi Lars, On 30/07/2019 12:22, Lars Kurth wrote: > > >> On 30 Jul 2019, at 11:08, George Dunlap <george.dunlap@citrix.com >> <mailto:george.dunlap@citrix.com>> wrote: >> >> On 7/30/19 10:54 AM, Julien Grall wrote: >>> Hi Jan, >>> >>> On 30/07/2019 10:05, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 30.07.2019 10:54, Julien Grall wrote: >>>>> On 7/30/19 9:29 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>>> On 30.07.2019 08:56, Lukasz Hawrylko wrote: > > +full committers list and Juergen > > OK. We should have a separate discussion related to disclaimers: make a formal > decision and afterwards document it in the contribution workflow. I agree that > this makes sense, and this has been raised by Julien in the past privately > related to questions on xen-devel@. It then turned out that Arm folks from China > have consistently used disclaimers on contributions to mini-os and unikraft. > This has stopped now, which is to Julien's credit. I suggested than that Julien > should raise this issue formally as a policy change, which never happened. > > I do not believe that we should block any patches from being applied due to > disclaimers in absence of an agreed policy. Contributors sign a DCO and that may > well override a disclaimer (we do not have access to the legal advice that Greg > KH refers to). If there was a serious legal issue, the LF would have contacted > all of its projects. And I also could not find any public reference to such an > issue. This definitely something where the Advisory Board should have some input. > > And in particular this patch also contains no code and should not be blocked on > these grounds. I originally objected on this patch because the disclaimer issue was pointed out 3 versions ago and still not addressed. This then went on the discussion with Jan about the disclaimer. While reviewer only means you are CC to e-mails, I would at least expect them to understand the process and be able to address comments. > > @Lukasz: please take note of this issue for the next time round. It should be > easy enough to disable the disclaimer when sending to certain lists It is not easy enough as you may think ;). At Arm we have to go through a different SMTP server so we bypass exchange. > > To move forward: > * There should be a policy discussion How should I raise it? Do you want a patch again contribution-guidelines? > * There should be AB input > * The outcome should be documented in > https://xenproject.org/help/contribution-guidelines/ and the git contribution > workflow Cheers, -- Julien Grall _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
I am waiting for another mail address dedicated for mailing lists that has the disclaimer disabled. This is an official way in Intel to do that. I don't know when it will be ready, but I expect that this process can take few days. From my perspective we can wait until I will have that mail address, so I can submit this patch in "blessed" way. Sorry for this confusion. Lukasz On Wed, 2019-07-31 at 12:52 +0100, Julien Grall wrote: > Hi Lars, > > On 30/07/2019 12:22, Lars Kurth wrote: > > > > > On 30 Jul 2019, at 11:08, George Dunlap < > > > george.dunlap@citrix.com > > > > > > <mailto: > > > george.dunlap@citrix.com > > > >> wrote: > > > > > > On 7/30/19 10:54 AM, Julien Grall wrote: > > > > Hi Jan, > > > > > > > > On 30/07/2019 10:05, Jan Beulich wrote: > > > > > On 30.07.2019 10:54, Julien Grall wrote: > > > > > > On 7/30/19 9:29 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: > > > > > > > On 30.07.2019 08:56, Lukasz Hawrylko wrote: > > > > +full committers list and Juergen > > > > OK. We should have a separate discussion related to disclaimers: > > make a formal > > decision and afterwards document it in the contribution workflow. I > > agree that > > this makes sense, and this has been raised by Julien in the past > > privately > > related to questions on xen-devel@. It then turned out that Arm > > folks from China > > have consistently used disclaimers on contributions to mini-os and > > unikraft. > > This has stopped now, which is to Julien's credit. I suggested than > > that Julien > > should raise this issue formally as a policy change, which never > > happened. > > > > I do not believe that we should block any patches from being applied > > due to > > disclaimers in absence of an agreed policy. Contributors sign a DCO > > and that may > > well override a disclaimer (we do not have access to the legal > > advice that Greg > > KH refers to). If there was a serious legal issue, the LF would have > > contacted > > all of its projects. And I also could not find any public reference > > to such an > > issue. This definitely something where the Advisory Board should > > have some input. > > > > And in particular this patch also contains no code and should not be > > blocked on > > these grounds. > > I originally objected on this patch because the disclaimer issue was > pointed out > 3 versions ago and still not addressed. This then went on the > discussion with > Jan about the disclaimer. > > While reviewer only means you are CC to e-mails, I would at least > expect them to > understand the process and be able to address comments. > > > @Lukasz: please take note of this issue for the next time round. It > > should be > > easy enough to disable the disclaimer when sending to certain lists > > It is not easy enough as you may think ;). At Arm we have to go > through a > different SMTP server so we bypass exchange. > > > To move forward: > > * There should be a policy discussion > > How should I raise it? Do you want a patch again contribution- > guidelines? > > > * There should be AB input > > * The outcome should be documented in > > https://xenproject.org/help/contribution-guidelines/ > > and the git contribution > > workflow > > Cheers, > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- Intel Technology Poland sp. z o.o. ul. Slowackiego 173 | 80-298 Gdansk | Sad Rejonowy Gdansk Polnoc | VII Wydzial Gospodarczy Krajowego Rejestru Sadowego - KRS 101882 | NIP 957-07-52-316 | Kapital zakladowy 200.000 PLN. Ta wiadomosc wraz z zalacznikami jest przeznaczona dla okreslonego adresata i moze zawierac informacje poufne. W razie przypadkowego otrzymania tej wiadomosci, prosimy o powiadomienie nadawcy oraz trwale jej usuniecie; jakiekolwiek przegladanie lub rozpowszechnianie jest zabronione. This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies; any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
> On 31 Jul 2019, at 12:52, Julien Grall <julien.grall@arm.com> wrote: > >> To move forward: >> * There should be a policy discussion > > How should I raise it? Do you want a patch again contribution-guidelines? I think we should start with an e-mail thread with an appropriate title on xen-devel@ (CCing committers@) outlining * What the proposal is and why it is important - How we document it is secondary and I am happy to pick this up after there is agreement * How it would be implemented - e.g. if the proposal was to reject e-mails with a disclaimer, we need to have a mechanism that does this reliably and also informs senders why a mail was not posted. We wouldn't want xen-devel@ to become a black hole, where stuff from some people gets lost without It then would have to go through a vote as normal. You may want to have a chat to Ian Jackson on IRC: he has some opinions and experience that is applicable I just agreed with Ian, that there will be a similar discussion related to the 2 step process to change maintainers via unsupported status, which also was highlighted in this thread. Although this can probably just be a patch to MAINTAINERS Regards Lars _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
I have sent request to IT how can I disable this disclaimer. It is added by server side for all mails that go outside Intel. I didn't see that footer when I read my own mail on mailing list. Lukasz -----Original Message----- From: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com> To: Julien Grall <julien.grall@arm.com> Cc: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>, George Dunlap < George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com>, Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>, Lukasz Hawrylko <lukasz.hawrylko@intel.com>, Stefano Stabellini < sstabellini@kernel.org>, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>, Tim Deegan <tim@xen.org>, Wei Liu <wl@xen.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Intel TXT: add reviewer, move to Odd Fixes state Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2019 09:05:09 +0000 On 30.07.2019 10:54, Julien Grall wrote: > On 7/30/19 9:29 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: > > On 30.07.2019 08:56, Lukasz Hawrylko wrote: > > > Support for Intel TXT has orphaned status right now because > > > no active maintainter is listed. Adding myself as reviewer > > > and moving it to Odd Fixes state. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Lukasz Hawrylko < > > > lukasz.hawrylko@intel.com > > > > > > > --- > > > MAINTAINERS | 3 ++- > > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS > > > index 89a01b710b..ca300e87c8 100644 > > > --- a/MAINTAINERS > > > +++ b/MAINTAINERS > > > @@ -240,7 +240,8 @@ S: Maintained > > > F: tools/golang > > > INTEL(R) TRUSTED EXECUTION TECHNOLOGY (TXT) > > > -S: Orphaned > > > +R: Lukasz Hawrylko < > > > lukasz.hawrylko@intel.com > > > > > > > +S: Odd Fixes > > > > I guess we should give it a few days for objections to be raised > > against this slightly inconsistent state, but I think that's the > > best way to express the current state of things (hence my > > suggestion to this effect). If no objections turn up, I've queued > > this onto my to-be-committed list. > > I have some objections regarding the process itself... On the first > version of this patch, it was pointed out that the e-mail shouldn't > be sent with disclaimer. This is now the third version and the > disclaimer is still present. Okay, I must have missed both earlier requests to this effect. I've gone back to the list archives though, and I couldn't find any such request either from July or June. Therefore ... > Technically, no patch should be applied when there are a disclaimer. ... I'd also like to ask for the background of this. It would never have occurred to me that I should pay attention to possible disclaimers or alike on patch submissions. Jan -------------------------------------------------------------------- Intel Technology Poland sp. z o.o. ul. Slowackiego 173 | 80-298 Gdansk | Sad Rejonowy Gdansk Polnoc | VII Wydzial Gospodarczy Krajowego Rejestru Sadowego - KRS 101882 | NIP 957-07-52-316 | Kapital zakladowy 200.000 PLN. Ta wiadomosc wraz z zalacznikami jest przeznaczona dla okreslonego adresata i moze zawierac informacje poufne. W razie przypadkowego otrzymania tej wiadomosci, prosimy o powiadomienie nadawcy oraz trwale jej usuniecie; jakiekolwiek przegladanie lub rozpowszechnianie jest zabronione. This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies; any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
© 2016 - 2024 Red Hat, Inc.