This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Subsystem maintainers
- From: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Torvald Riegel <triegel at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Thomas Schwinge <thomas at codesourcery dot com>, Carlos O'Donell <carlos at redhat dot com>, <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2014 11:45:43 +0000
- Subject: Re: Subsystem maintainers
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <Pine dot LNX dot 4 dot 64 dot 1409232040060 dot 8132 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <Pine dot LNX dot 4 dot 64 dot 1409301439570 dot 15186 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <542AC26E dot 5070906 at redhat dot com> <Pine dot LNX dot 4 dot 64 dot 1410071615260 dot 28196 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <54342BE2 dot 6000006 at redhat dot com> <1412711085 dot 30642 dot 122 dot camel at triegel dot csb> <87bnpmrivo dot fsf at kepler dot schwinge dot homeip dot net> <1412764301 dot 30642 dot 132 dot camel at triegel dot csb>
On Wed, 8 Oct 2014, Torvald Riegel wrote:
> > I agree. So, basically, extend (and rename)
> > <https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/MAINTAINERS#Reviewers_by_component>.
>
> Or add the additional column for "component owners".
>
> We might also want to not just base this on components, but other
> cross-cutting things like "security". For example, I'd be happy to
> review everything related to concurrency.
And the conform/ tests which I volunteered to maintain don't have a
Bugzilla component (nor do they need one - I think there are zero open
bugs for them). So, yes, maintainers and reviewers make sense in areas
not directly corresponding to Bugzilla components (but if significant
parts of the catch-all "libc" component can be clearly distinguished from
the rest, it's possible more Bugzilla components should be added
accordingly - though we added a few components a while back for some such
areas).
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com