I think that sounds too involved. How many maintainers would we really be looking at at this point? I think only around 5 - 10 really. So a single file in the root seems easiest.
The other concern is some components of GHC are all over the place. I'm also the maintainer for Safe Haskell and that involves code in a few different folders. On 6 December 2012 08:42, Johan Tibell <johan.tib...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 8:32 AM, Ian Lynagh <i...@well-typed.com> wrote: >> Perhaps we could have "maintainers" instead? > > If maintenance can be defined on a per-directory level we can put a > MAINTAINERS file in listing maintainers for a directory and all its > subdirectories. For example, > > ghc/MAINTAINERS would contain > simonpj > simonmar > > libraries/base/GHC/Event/MAINTAINERS would contain > tibbe > bos > > ghc/compiler/llvmGen would contain > benl > davidterei > > and so on. To find a maintainer (e.g. to send a request for code > review to) you follow the directory hierarchy upwards, starting from > the directory in which you want to make modifications, until you find > a MAINTAINERS file. You then pick one of the maintainers there and > assign the ticket with the attached code for them to review. > > Perhaps this is a bit too involved given the number of people involved. > > -- Johan > > _______________________________________________ > Cvs-ghc mailing list > Cvs-ghc@haskell.org > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ghc _______________________________________________ Cvs-ghc mailing list Cvs-ghc@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ghc
