erichkeane wrote: > > But Maintainers are empowered to make some decisions, and in this case > > That's not my reading of the LLVM policy, nor how I've seen it applied in > other areas of LLVM. From the docs that I linked: > > > Maintainers are volunteering to take on the following shared > > responsibilities within an area of a project: > > > > * ensure that commits receive high-quality review, either by the maintainer > > or by someone else, > > * help to confirm and comment on issues, > > * mediate code review disagreements through collaboration with other > > maintainers (and other reviewers) to come to a consensus on how best to > > proceed with disputed changes, > > * actively engage with relevant RFCs, > > * aid release managers with backporting and other release-related > > activities, > > * be a point of contact for contributors who need help (answering questions > > on Discord/Discourse or holding office hours). > > In any case, no objections from me. My review backlog is very long these > days, so I'll leave this to folks who are more up-to-date with the context. > Thanks again for working on this!
This part: >mediate code review disagreements through collaboration with other maintainers >(and other reviewers) to come to a consensus on how best to proceed with >disputed changes, Is what happened. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/227256 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
