This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Aarch64 machine maintainership
- From: Siddhesh Poyarekar <siddhesh at gotplt dot org>
- To: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: Steve Ellcey <sellcey at caviumnetworks dot com>, Szabolcs Nagy <szabolcs dot nagy at arm dot com>, Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gmail dot com>, nd at arm dot com, Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval dot zanella at linaro dot org>, Wilco Dijkstra <Wilco dot Dijkstra at arm dot com>, "libc-alpha at sourceware dot org" <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>, Marcus Shawcroft <Marcus dot Shawcroft at arm dot com>
- Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 23:22:29 +0530
- Subject: Re: Aarch64 machine maintainership
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <AM5PR0802MB2610A11854986B9A53EBC68783430@AM5PR0802MB2610.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> <c0e44c88-244d-e327-de4b-02470c3a78cf@linaro.org> <1486509609.2866.59.camel@caviumnetworks.com> <805d8c52-1397-ddd0-71cc-93d019f8a7f2@gotplt.org> <1486598532.2866.66.camel@caviumnetworks.com> <589C4992.10505@arm.com> <CA+=Sn1k7BYS4G1Xwpeteif_JK4tdh0O9wCg9WOez4L=C3hMaYQ@mail.gmail.com> <1486688083.2866.82.camel@caviumnetworks.com> <1487809656.2866.171.camel@caviumnetworks.com> <54d21a51-1156-879c-7847-1b19eaca9b3e@gotplt.org> <1487866836.2866.173.camel@caviumnetworks.com> <eabb56f8-bea6-7375-019e-5a6365120a50@gotplt.org> <1487868166.2866.176.camel@caviumnetworks.com> <da742e76-0702-fb09-a1c3-86aadea5179e@gotplt.org> <1488394091.2866.259.camel@caviumnetworks.com> <58C83A67.4060806@arm.com> <1489621977.2451.46.camel@caviumnetworks.com> <1de274d5-b6cf-d27b-68ac-01b6480046a0@gotplt.org> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1703221732360.16332@digraph.polyomino.org.uk>
On Wednesday 22 March 2017 11:04 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
> No, machine patches are subject to consensus just like any other patches,
> and such consensus can be reached without needing a machine maintainer to
> comment (although one might hope they would review most substantial
> patches for their machine).
That is not very clear from the Consensus wiki page, so I added the
following to the machine maintainer section:
* If you are not a maintainer for the machine you're proposing the
change for, your patches are subject to consensus like any other
patches and while review from a machine maintainer may be ideal, it
is not strictly necessary for the patch to be accepted.
Siddhesh