This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Kill libc-ports?
- From: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Carlos O'Donell <carlos at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Siddhesh Poyarekar <siddhesh at redhat dot com>, <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2013 17:05:17 +0000
- Subject: Re: Kill libc-ports?
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20130905121121 dot GN4306 at spoyarek dot pnq dot redhat dot com> <Pine dot LNX dot 4 dot 64 dot 1309051534260 dot 28271 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <20130906052150 dot GS4306 at spoyarek dot pnq dot redhat dot com> <Pine dot LNX dot 4 dot 64 dot 1309061227310 dot 3054 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <522A0921 dot 6050704 at redhat dot com>
On Fri, 6 Sep 2013, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> On 09/06/2013 08:38 AM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> > My suggestion is that libc-ports would be for all architectures (where
> > architecture maintainer action is needed) rather than just for some
> > subset.
>
> I like this idea.
>
> I suggest:
>
> * Leave libc-alpha as the main high-volume development list.
> - Discuss all development on this list for all machines.
> - Thomas reminded me of all the reasons why we shouldn't just
> arbitrarily change mailing list names.
> - You can still tag your emails if you want with [all-arch]
> or [s390][ppc], but subscribing to another mailing list is
> just easier for filtering.
>
> * Use libc-ports as the low-volume cross-all-ports change notification list.
> - Joseph makes a good point about high-volume on libc-alpha and a need
> for a developer notification list.
>
> Comments?
In this model, one should add:
- If you have a patch for one specific architecture you want the
architecture maintainer to review, send it to libc-alpha and CC the
maintainer (so libc-ports stays low-volume and is specifically for
all-architecture or many-architecture notifications, where people trying
to produce a CC list of maintainers covering all architectures usually get
it wrong and miss some out).
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com