Re: [Xen-devel] interface header maintainership (was Re: [PATCH 2/2] netif: define XEN_NETIF_NR_SLOTS_MIN in public header)

[Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, 2013-05-02 at 10:30 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 01.05.13 at 12:19, Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2013-04-30 at 18:06 +0100, Wei Liu wrote:
> >> Xen network protocol has implicit dependency on MAX_SKB_FRAGS. In order to
> >> remove dependency on MAX_SKB_FRAGS, we derive a constant from historical
> >> MAX_SKB_FRAGS for future reference.
> >> 
> >> Signed-off-by: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > 
> > Acked-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> In order to not require Keir to ack any trivial change like this,
> wouldn't it make sense to list you as the maintainer for
> xen/include/public/io/netif.h, and Konrad similarly for blkif.h,
> matching the Linux side maintainership?

My only concern is that the I/O interfaces should be independent from
the Linux implementation and by having the Linux maintainer be the *if.h
maintainer risks unintentionally baking (more) Linux'isms into our
interfaces or at least failing to fully consider the other OSes.

So I think any decision regarding maintainership of io/*.h should be
made independently of the Linux maintainership, even if the result is
that the "best" person happens to also be the Linux maintainer.

With that said I'm happy to try and wear both hats at the appropriate
times.

Ian.


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel