public inbox for libc-alpha@sourceware.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Maintainer status: patch review required?
@ 2021-06-29 10:29 Florian Weimer
  2021-06-29 12:46 ` Siddhesh Poyarekar
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Florian Weimer @ 2021-06-29 10:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: libc-alpha

<https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/MAINTAINERS> says this:

| Where someone is listed in the Maintainers column, they may at their
| discretion consider their own patches in that area to have consensus
| without waiting for third-party review, although other people may
| still review patches in that area and it may turn out that a patch by
| someone listed does not in fact have consensus and needs changing or
| reverting.

But I'm not sure to what extent we follow that process today.

I have some libresolv changes coming up (rather tedious stuff—splitting
things into files, GNU style conversion, then moving into libc), and I'm
listed as the network maintainer.  So per the wiki, I could just push
them.  Is this what we want?

Thanks,
Florian


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

* Re: Maintainer status: patch review required?
  2021-06-29 10:29 Maintainer status: patch review required? Florian Weimer
@ 2021-06-29 12:46 ` Siddhesh Poyarekar
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Siddhesh Poyarekar @ 2021-06-29 12:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Florian Weimer, libc-alpha

On 6/29/21 3:59 PM, Florian Weimer via Libc-alpha wrote:
> <https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/MAINTAINERS> says this:
> 
> | Where someone is listed in the Maintainers column, they may at their
> | discretion consider their own patches in that area to have consensus
> | without waiting for third-party review, although other people may
> | still review patches in that area and it may turn out that a patch by
> | someone listed does not in fact have consensus and needs changing or
> | reverting.
> 
> But I'm not sure to what extent we follow that process today.
> 
> I have some libresolv changes coming up (rather tedious stuff—splitting
> things into files, GNU style conversion, then moving into libc), and I'm
> listed as the network maintainer.  So per the wiki, I could just push
> them.  Is this what we want?

My understanding of that is that the listed maintainers are trusted to 
push code if they're confident about their change.  They're always free 
to ask for review if they aren't sure or would like a second pair of 
eyes on the patches.  So in that context, if you're sure about the 
change, go for it, we trust you to be more right than wrong :)

Siddhesh

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2021-06-29 12:46 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2021-06-29 10:29 Maintainer status: patch review required? Florian Weimer
2021-06-29 12:46 ` Siddhesh Poyarekar

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).