linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: contacts for the gfs2 tree

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]

Date:   Wed, 15 Nov 2023 23:18:03 +0100
From:   Andreas Gruenbacher <agruenba@...hat.com>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@...hat.com>
Cc:     Bob Peterson <rpeterso@...hat.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: contacts for the gfs2 tree

Hi Stephen,

On Wed, Nov 15, 2023 at 9:40 PM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I noticed commit
>
>   2e6ef8aaba6b ("Remove myself as maintainer of GFS2")
>
> Currently I have
>
> Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@...hat.com>
> Bob Peterson <rpeterso@...hat.com>
>
> listed as the only contacts for the gfs2 tree.
>
> Should I change that to
>
> Andreas Gruenbacher <agruenba@...hat.com>
>
> or keep Steven (even though he is not listed in MAINTAINERS)?  And should
> I add the mailing list as well?

I think it would make sense to put me in instead of Bob. Steve hasn't
been working on the actual code for a while -- even though he remains
a valuable source of information for GFS2 -- so I don't think he will
object to being removed here.

For the time being, I will be the only person screwing up the upstream
gfs2 repository, so I'll also be the person to fix things up again. In
that context, would it make sense to add the gfs2 list? Is this what
you would commonly do?

Thanks,
Andreas