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

[Julien Grall <julien.grall@xxxxxxx>]

Hi,

Jumping into the conversation.

On 24/10/2019 14:06, Jeff Kubascik wrote:
> On 10/21/2019 7:43 AM, Wei Liu wrote:
> > CAUTION: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click 
> > links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content 
> > is safe.
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 12:29:45PM +0100, George Dunlap wrote:
> > > On 8/30/19 10:28 AM, Wei Liu wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 10:08:55AM -0400, Jeff Kubascik wrote:
> > > > > We would like to have a common maintainers email address for DornerWorks
> > > > > maintained code, which currently is the ARINC653 scheduler. This will
> > > > > enable us to better monitor and respond to the Xen community. This patch
> > > > > adds a maintainer line with the DornerWorks maintainers email address.
> > > > > ---
> > > > >   MAINTAINERS | 1 +
> > > > >   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > > > >
> > > > > diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
> > > > > index 77413e0d9e..3cce253931 100644
> > > > > --- a/MAINTAINERS
> > > > > +++ b/MAINTAINERS
> > > > > @@ -168,6 +168,7 @@ F:     xen/common/argo.c
> > > > >   ARINC653 SCHEDULER
> > > > >   M:        Josh Whitehead <josh.whitehead@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > >   M:        Robert VanVossen <robert.vanvossen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > +M:        DornerWorks Xen-Devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > The correct symbol here is L.
> > > >
> > > >      L: Mailing list that is relevant to this area
> > > But this isn't exactly a mailing list, is it?  The 'L:' tag is normally
> > > for things like the Linux Arm mailing list, the Linux Net mailing list,
> > > and so on -- *public* lists where discussions about that subsystem happen.
> > >
> > > This isn't a public list where discussion happens.  At the moment, in
> > > fact, it looks like it might be a *single email account*, to which
> > > several people have access; at best it would be an alias that would go
> > > to a number of interested parties.  That seems closer to 'R:'.
> > >
> > > I admit this is getting into the minutia of technicalities here. :-)
> > My understanding is that the list being public is a not a requirement.
> > For example, Linux has this:
> >
> >    L:      sparmaintainer@xxxxxxxxxx (Unisys internal)
> >
> > An alias for several people still qualifies as a list to me.
> >
> > Anyway, either R or L works. I don't want to bikeshed further...
> >
> > Wei.
> >
> > >   -George
> 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?
Cheers,

--
Julien Grall

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