linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] MAINTAINERS: Add myself as co-maintainer to fpga mgr framework.

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <abcd566c-3ba8-71cb-272c-301d04e599ea@xilinx.com>
Date:   Tue, 22 Nov 2016 09:28:23 +0100
From:   Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com>
CC:     atull <atull@...nsource.altera.com>,
        Moritz Fischer <moritz.fischer@...us.com>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <marex@...x.de>,
        <mbrugger@...e.com>, <jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com>,
        <mike.looijmans@...ic.nl>, <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "Moritz Fischer" <mdf@...nel.org>, <linux-fpga@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] MAINTAINERS: Add myself as co-maintainer to fpga mgr
 framework.

On 22.11.2016 09:07, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 08:48:57AM +0100, Michal Simek wrote:
>> On 22.11.2016 03:29, atull wrote:
>>> On Mon, 21 Nov 2016, Moritz Fischer wrote:
>>>
>>>> Add myself as co-maintainer to fpga mgr framework.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Moritz Fischer <mdf@...nel.org>
>>>> Cc: Alan Tull <atull@...nsource.altera.com>
>>>> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
>>>> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
>>>> Cc: linux-fpga@...r.kernel.org
>>>> ---
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> Lately we've fallen behind a bit on reviewing patches lately.
>>>
>>> Hi Moritz,
>>>
>>> drivers/fpga has been in the upstream kernel a year now.  Most of that
>>> time, traffic has been very slow.  Recently we had more traffic while
>>> I was travelling and moving to a new office, both cases leaving me
>>> with bad network connectivity.  Things will probably return to normal.
>>> I appreciate your passion and all your effort reviewing stuff.  I
>>> don't see a need for two maintainers at this point.
>>
>> TBH. I think it is not a bad option. I do normally have backup person
>> for all repos I do maintain. It doesn't mean that second maintainer does
>> something but it has all accesses to repos you maintain.
>> It means if something really happens to you (hopefully not) than this
>> person can continue in this work without any delay which is not a bad
>> thing.
>> It is really just about talking to each other what that second person
>> will do - probably just review patches as is done now. You can also
>> learn from each other.
>> I would like to be involved more in this but unfortunately I don't have
>> enough time to do it properly.
>>
>> Regarding maintaining this repo. It is just standard process. Apply
>> sensible things, well described and test it. And then send pull request
>> to Greg based on signed tags and you are done.
>> Greg should told you what should be the base which you should use for
>> pull request. Someone is taking patches based on rc1 tag, someone is
>> rebasing it on the final tag.
> 
> Greg doesn't care what base you use, as long as you don't rebase
> patches.  What subsystem does that?  I need to go yell at someone...

:-) Not sure if there is any subsystem which use this.
And for my microblaze tree I do normally base patches on the top of
rc7/8 or final tag but that's done mostly because I collect patches at
that time. But IIRC when I started with this someone mentioned that for
small number of patches this is fine.

Thanks,
Michal