This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Official Linux system wrapper library?
- From: Carlos O'Donell <carlos at redhat dot com>
- To: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso at mit dot edu>, Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>, Daniel Colascione <dancol at google dot com>, Szabolcs Nagy <Szabolcs dot Nagy at arm dot com>, Dave P Martin <Dave dot Martin at arm dot com>, nd <nd at arm dot com>, Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com>, "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk dot manpages at gmail dot com>, linux-kernel <linux-kernel at vger dot kernel dot org>, Joel Fernandes <joelaf at google dot com>, Linux API <linux-api at vger dot kernel dot org>, Willy Tarreau <w at 1wt dot eu>, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka at suse dot cz>, "libc-alpha at sourceware dot org" <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2018 16:00:12 -0500
- Subject: Re: Official Linux system wrapper library?
- References: <email@example.com> <CAKOZuetdgk1QYhx1538-98rFpogMin=8DkPnCtU9_=ip23Vk7w@mail.gmail.com> <20181113193859.GJ3505@e103592.cambridge.arm.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <CAKOZuesta_V=doXsVLc2E6WCQvywdur3F+u2pFKaPN+CEQd+ZQ@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.email@example.com> <CAKOZuetCGCfNdJ2QM0phu3_3Q29f5Yeh=NHiM_A9MhHsCjK48A@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.firstname.lastname@example.org> <20181115053026.GA20617@thunk.org> <alpine.DEB.email@example.com> <20181115170807.GB20617@thunk.org>
On 11/15/18 12:08 PM, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 04:29:43PM +0000, Joseph Myers wrote:
>> On Thu, 15 Nov 2018, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
>>> That's great. But is it or is it not true (either de jure or de
>>> facto) that "a single active glibc developer" can block a system call
>>> from being supported by glibc by objecting? And if not, under what is
>>> the process by resolving a conflict?
>> We use a consensus-building process as described at
> So can a single glibc developer can block Consensus?
I think the comparison to the "liberum veto" is not a fair
comparison to the way the glibc community works :-)
(1) Community consensus.
Consensus need not imply unanimity.
Consensus is only from the set of important and concerned
interests. The community gets to decide that you're a troll
that does no real work, and can therefore ignore you.
Consensus is blocked only by sustained objection (not just
normal objections, which are recorded as part of the
development process e.g. "I don't like it, but I leave it
up to you to decide").
Therefore an involved glibc developer can lodge a sustained
objection, and block consensus.
(2) The GNU package maintainers for glibc.
There are 8 GNU package maintainers for glibc.
The package maintainers created the consensus process to
empower the community, but they can act as a final
review committee to move issues where there are two
reasonable but competing view points.
As Joseph points out we haven't ever used the GNU pakcage
maintainers to vote on a stuck issue, but I will arrange
it when the need arises. If you think we're at that point
with wrapper functions, just say so, but it doesn't seem
like it to me.