[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c82ee004-f0e3-ba23-2131-ea7c1c13f9a9@linaro.org>
Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2017 14:55:09 +0000
From: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@...aro.org>
To: Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@...driver.com>,
Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
Cc: kgdb-bugreport@...ts.sourceforge.net,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Kgdb-bugreport] [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: kgdb: Replace Jason with
Daniel
On 05/12/17 14:37, Jason Wessel wrote:
> On 12/05/2017 08:09 AM, Lee Jones wrote:
>> On Tue, 05 Dec 2017, Daniel Thompson wrote:
>>
>>> ... with many, many thanks for Jason for all his hard work.
>>>
>>> Cc: Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@...driver.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@...aro.org>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> Notes:
>>> Over the years Jason has become increasingly hard to get hold off
>>> and I think he must now be regarded as inactive.
>>> Patches in kgdb-next (mine as it happens) have been there for
>>> over a
>>> year without a corresponding pull request and a couple of
>>> architecture
>>> specific kgdb fixes have ended up missing a release cycle (or
>>> two) as
>>> the architecture maintainer waits for an Acked-by from Jason.
>>> In the past I've had to rely on Andrew M. to land my own changes to
>>> kgdb and in the v4.14 cycle you'll find my Acked-by on b8347c219649
>>> ("x86/debug: Handle warnings before the notifier chain, to fix KGDB
>>> crash"). That I was sharing surrogate acks convinced me we need a
>>> change here and I've offered Jason help via private e-mail without
>>> reply.
>>> So, I really would prefer it it if this patch listed me as a
>>> co-maintainer or, failing that, as least had Jason's blessing...
>>> but
>>> it doesn't. I certainly suggest this patch takes a long time in
>>> review, and if it doesn't attract Jason's attention then I can only
>>> reiterate what is says in the commit log: Thanks Jason!
>>>
>>> MAINTAINERS | 3 +--
>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> It looks like Jason has been inactive in all aspects of upstream
>> maintainership and as a contributor for well over a year now.
>
> I have not been working directly on upstream kernel contributions for
> quite some time. It doesn't mean I haven't been involved with kernel
> development. Patches that I have reviewed or suggested to other
> developers generally don't bare my name. I wouldn't mind trying to take
> a slightly more gradual passing of the baton and add Daniel as
> co-maintainer for a while before I retire from kernel work and merge
> myself away in the coming years. :-)
Great to hear from you again! I shall consider this patch nacked or the
time being ;-)... and if you are happy with help from me I shall leave
it to you to propose an update to MAINTAINERS.
> I have a series of 50+ patches for kgdb/kdb/usb which have never been
> published. I am not saying that we actually need any of those patches,
> but it would be nice to let the community decide, and we can see if
> there is anything worth merging into the next cycle or future work with
> other maintainers. My kernel.org tree stopped working a long time ago,
> probably from inactivity. I'll see if that can get restored in the next
> few days, or I'll use my github tree and send the unpublished work to
> the mailing list as an RFC.
I, for one, would be interested to see these.
Daniel.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists