Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on active community members
On 11/5/23 02:22, Kinney, Michael D wrote: > Hi Laszlo, > > I have sent patch review to remove Orphan status option from Maintainers.txt. > > I have also opened the following 3 BZs > > OvmfPkg/CSM: https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4588 > SignedCapsulePkg: https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4589 > SourceLevelDebugPkg: https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4590 Thanks, I've taken <https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4588>. Laszlo > > Best regards, > > Mike > >> -Original Message- >> From: Laszlo Ersek >> Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2023 3:25 AM >> To: devel@edk2.groups.io; Kinney, Michael D >> >> Cc: Andrew Fish ; Leif Lindholm >> ; Warkentin, Andrei >> ; West, Catharine >> ; Bi, Dandan ; Daniel >> Schaefer ; David Woodhouse >> ; De, Debkumar ; Dong, >> Eric ; Jiang, Guomin ; >> Wu, Hao A ; James Bottomley ; >> Wang, Jian J ; Justen, Jordan L >> ; Julien Grall ; Peter >> Grehan ; Zhang, Qi1 ; Ng, Ray >> Han Lim ; Stefan Berger >> ; Hou, Wenxing ; Lu, >> Xiaoyu1 >> Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on >> active community members >> >> On 10/28/23 21:23, Michael D Kinney wrote: >>> Over the past few months, all the of the Maintainers and >>> Reviewers listed in Maintainers.txt have been contacted to make >>> sure Maintainers.txt accurately represents the TianoCore >>> community members that are actively participating in their >>> roles. Based on specific feedback, bounced emails, and no >>> responses, updates have been made. >>> >>> * RISCV64: Daniel Schaefer replaced with Andrei Warkentin >>> * ArmVirtPkg Xen has no remaining reviewers and review >>> responsibility defaults to ArmVirtPkg Maintainers/Reviewers. >>> * ACPI modules related to S3 has no remaining reviewers and >>> review responsibility defaults to MdeModulePkg Maintainers/ >>> Reviewers. >>> * OVMF CSM modules has no remaining reviewers and review >>> responsibility defaults to OvmfPkg Maintainers/Reviewers. >>> * Bounce: Chan Laura >>> * Many smaller updates removing individuals that are no >>> longer involved or have replacement coverage. >>> >>> Cc: Andrew Fish >>> Cc: Leif Lindholm >>> Cc: Andrei Warkentin >>> Cc: Catharine West >>> Cc: Dandan Bi >>> Cc: Daniel Schaefer >>> Cc: David Woodhouse >>> Cc: Debkumar De >>> Cc: Eric Dong >>> Cc: Guomin Jiang >>> Cc: Hao A Wu >>> Cc: James Bottomley >>> Cc: Jian J Wang >>> Cc: Jordan Justen >>> Cc: Julien Grall >>> Cc: Peter Grehan >>> Cc: Qi Zhang >>> Cc: Ray Han Lim Ng >>> Cc: Stefan Berger >>> Cc: Wenxing Hou >>> Cc: Xiaoyu Lu >>> Signed-off-by: Michael D Kinney >>> --- >>> Maintainers.txt | 53 ++ >> --- >>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 51 deletions(-) >> >> FWIW: >> >> Reviewed-by: Laszlo Ersek >> >> Additionally, based on Mike's explanation down-thread, I'm proposing: >> >> - a follow-up patch to Maintainers.txt where we remove the "Orphan" >> status from the generic description, >> >> - filing three separate BZs, for the removal of OvmfPkg/Csm/, >> SignedCapsulePkg, and SourceLevelDebugPkg, respectively (where the >> latter two could be moved to edk2-platforms), >> >> - I'm happy to take on the OvmfPkg/Csm/ removal BZ. >> >> Laszlo > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#110679): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/110679 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/102245264/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/leave/9847357/21656/1706620634/xyzzy [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on active community members
Hi Laszlo, I have sent patch review to remove Orphan status option from Maintainers.txt. I have also opened the following 3 BZs OvmfPkg/CSM: https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4588 SignedCapsulePkg: https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4589 SourceLevelDebugPkg: https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4590 Best regards, Mike > -Original Message- > From: Laszlo Ersek > Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2023 3:25 AM > To: devel@edk2.groups.io; Kinney, Michael D > > Cc: Andrew Fish ; Leif Lindholm > ; Warkentin, Andrei > ; West, Catharine > ; Bi, Dandan ; Daniel > Schaefer ; David Woodhouse > ; De, Debkumar ; Dong, > Eric ; Jiang, Guomin ; > Wu, Hao A ; James Bottomley ; > Wang, Jian J ; Justen, Jordan L > ; Julien Grall ; Peter > Grehan ; Zhang, Qi1 ; Ng, Ray > Han Lim ; Stefan Berger > ; Hou, Wenxing ; Lu, > Xiaoyu1 > Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on > active community members > > On 10/28/23 21:23, Michael D Kinney wrote: > > Over the past few months, all the of the Maintainers and > > Reviewers listed in Maintainers.txt have been contacted to make > > sure Maintainers.txt accurately represents the TianoCore > > community members that are actively participating in their > > roles. Based on specific feedback, bounced emails, and no > > responses, updates have been made. > > > > * RISCV64: Daniel Schaefer replaced with Andrei Warkentin > > * ArmVirtPkg Xen has no remaining reviewers and review > > responsibility defaults to ArmVirtPkg Maintainers/Reviewers. > > * ACPI modules related to S3 has no remaining reviewers and > > review responsibility defaults to MdeModulePkg Maintainers/ > > Reviewers. > > * OVMF CSM modules has no remaining reviewers and review > > responsibility defaults to OvmfPkg Maintainers/Reviewers. > > * Bounce: Chan Laura > > * Many smaller updates removing individuals that are no > > longer involved or have replacement coverage. > > > > Cc: Andrew Fish > > Cc: Leif Lindholm > > Cc: Andrei Warkentin > > Cc: Catharine West > > Cc: Dandan Bi > > Cc: Daniel Schaefer > > Cc: David Woodhouse > > Cc: Debkumar De > > Cc: Eric Dong > > Cc: Guomin Jiang > > Cc: Hao A Wu > > Cc: James Bottomley > > Cc: Jian J Wang > > Cc: Jordan Justen > > Cc: Julien Grall > > Cc: Peter Grehan > > Cc: Qi Zhang > > Cc: Ray Han Lim Ng > > Cc: Stefan Berger > > Cc: Wenxing Hou > > Cc: Xiaoyu Lu > > Signed-off-by: Michael D Kinney > > --- > > Maintainers.txt | 53 ++ > --- > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 51 deletions(-) > > FWIW: > > Reviewed-by: Laszlo Ersek > > Additionally, based on Mike's explanation down-thread, I'm proposing: > > - a follow-up patch to Maintainers.txt where we remove the "Orphan" > status from the generic description, > > - filing three separate BZs, for the removal of OvmfPkg/Csm/, > SignedCapsulePkg, and SourceLevelDebugPkg, respectively (where the > latter two could be moved to edk2-platforms), > > - I'm happy to take on the OvmfPkg/Csm/ removal BZ. > > Laszlo -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#110676): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/110676 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/102245264/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/leave/9847357/21656/1706620634/xyzzy [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on active community members
Merged: https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/pull/5001 > -Original Message- > From: devel@edk2.groups.io On Behalf Of Leif > Lindholm > Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2023 5:27 AM > To: devel@edk2.groups.io; Kinney, Michael D > > Cc: Andrew Fish ; Warkentin, Andrei > ; West, Catharine > ; Bi, Dandan ; Daniel > Schaefer ; David Woodhouse > ; De, Debkumar ; Dong, > Eric ; Jiang, Guomin ; > Wu, Hao A ; James Bottomley ; > Wang, Jian J ; Justen, Jordan L > ; Julien Grall ; Peter > Grehan ; Zhang, Qi1 ; Ng, Ray > Han Lim ; Stefan Berger > ; Hou, Wenxing ; Lu, > Xiaoyu1 > Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on > active community members > > On Sat, Oct 28, 2023 at 12:23:30 -0700, Michael D Kinney wrote: > > Over the past few months, all the of the Maintainers and > > Reviewers listed in Maintainers.txt have been contacted to make > > sure Maintainers.txt accurately represents the TianoCore > > community members that are actively participating in their > > roles. Based on specific feedback, bounced emails, and no > > responses, updates have been made. > > > > * RISCV64: Daniel Schaefer replaced with Andrei Warkentin > > * ArmVirtPkg Xen has no remaining reviewers and review > > responsibility defaults to ArmVirtPkg Maintainers/Reviewers. > > * ACPI modules related to S3 has no remaining reviewers and > > review responsibility defaults to MdeModulePkg Maintainers/ > > Reviewers. > > * OVMF CSM modules has no remaining reviewers and review > > responsibility defaults to OvmfPkg Maintainers/Reviewers. > > * Bounce: Chan Laura > > * Many smaller updates removing individuals that are no > > longer involved or have replacement coverage. > > > > Cc: Andrew Fish > > Cc: Leif Lindholm > > Cc: Andrei Warkentin > > Cc: Catharine West > > Cc: Dandan Bi > > Cc: Daniel Schaefer > > Cc: David Woodhouse > > Cc: Debkumar De > > Cc: Eric Dong > > Cc: Guomin Jiang > > Cc: Hao A Wu > > Cc: James Bottomley > > Cc: Jian J Wang > > Cc: Jordan Justen > > Cc: Julien Grall > > Cc: Peter Grehan > > Cc: Qi Zhang > > Cc: Ray Han Lim Ng > > Cc: Stefan Berger > > Cc: Wenxing Hou > > Cc: Xiaoyu Lu > > Signed-off-by: Michael D Kinney > > Reviewed-by: Leif Lindholm > > (I have some comments for later in the thread, but they do not affect > this patch.) > > / > Leif > > > --- > > Maintainers.txt | 53 ++ > --- > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 51 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/Maintainers.txt b/Maintainers.txt > > index 3f40cdeb5554..2b03ccbe54aa 100644 > > --- a/Maintainers.txt > > +++ b/Maintainers.txt > > @@ -93,7 +93,7 @@ M: Sami Mujawar > [samimujawar] > > RISCV64 > > F: */RiscV64/ > > M: Sunil V L [vlsunil] > > -R: Daniel Schaefer [JohnAZoidberg] > > +R: Andrei Warkentin [andreiw] > > > > LOONGARCH64 > > F: */LoongArch64/ > > @@ -157,16 +157,6 @@ R: Leif Lindholm > [leiflindholm] > > R: Sami Mujawar [samimujawar] > > R: Gerd Hoffmann [kraxel] > > > > -ArmVirtPkg: modules used on Xen > > -F: ArmVirtPkg/ArmVirtXen.* > > -F: ArmVirtPkg/Library/XenArmGenericTimerVirtCounterLib/ > > -F: ArmVirtPkg/Library/XenVirtMemInfoLib/ > > -F: ArmVirtPkg/PrePi/ > > -F: ArmVirtPkg/XenAcpiPlatformDxe/ > > -F: ArmVirtPkg/XenPlatformHasAcpiDtDxe/ > > -F: ArmVirtPkg/XenioFdtDxe/ > > -R: Julien Grall [jgrall] > > - > > BaseTools > > F: BaseTools/ > > W: https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/BaseTools > > @@ -187,8 +177,7 @@ F: CryptoPkg/ > > W: https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/CryptoPkg > > M: Jiewen Yao [jyao1] > > M: Yi Li [liyi77] > > -R: Xiaoyu Lu [xiaoyuxlu] > > -R: Guomin Jiang [guominjia] > > +R: Wenxing Hou [Wenxing-hou] > > > > DynamicTablesPkg > > F: DynamicTablesPkg/ > > @@ -202,7 +191,6 @@ W: > https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/EmbeddedPkg > > M: Leif Lindholm [leiflindholm] > > M: Ard Biesheuvel [ardbiesheuvel] > > M: Abner Chang [changab] > > -R: Daniel Schaefer [JohnAZoidberg] > > > > EmulatorPkg > > F: EmulatorPkg/ > > @@ -228,7 +216,6 @@ F: FmpDevicePkg/ > > W: > https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/FmpDevicePkg > > M: Liming Gao [lgao4] > > M: Michael D Kinney [mdkinney] > > -R: Guomin Jiang [guominjia] > &g
Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on active community members
On Sat, Oct 28, 2023 at 12:23:30 -0700, Michael D Kinney wrote: > Over the past few months, all the of the Maintainers and > Reviewers listed in Maintainers.txt have been contacted to make > sure Maintainers.txt accurately represents the TianoCore > community members that are actively participating in their > roles. Based on specific feedback, bounced emails, and no > responses, updates have been made. > > * RISCV64: Daniel Schaefer replaced with Andrei Warkentin > * ArmVirtPkg Xen has no remaining reviewers and review > responsibility defaults to ArmVirtPkg Maintainers/Reviewers. > * ACPI modules related to S3 has no remaining reviewers and > review responsibility defaults to MdeModulePkg Maintainers/ > Reviewers. > * OVMF CSM modules has no remaining reviewers and review > responsibility defaults to OvmfPkg Maintainers/Reviewers. > * Bounce: Chan Laura > * Many smaller updates removing individuals that are no > longer involved or have replacement coverage. > > Cc: Andrew Fish > Cc: Leif Lindholm > Cc: Andrei Warkentin > Cc: Catharine West > Cc: Dandan Bi > Cc: Daniel Schaefer > Cc: David Woodhouse > Cc: Debkumar De > Cc: Eric Dong > Cc: Guomin Jiang > Cc: Hao A Wu > Cc: James Bottomley > Cc: Jian J Wang > Cc: Jordan Justen > Cc: Julien Grall > Cc: Peter Grehan > Cc: Qi Zhang > Cc: Ray Han Lim Ng > Cc: Stefan Berger > Cc: Wenxing Hou > Cc: Xiaoyu Lu > Signed-off-by: Michael D Kinney Reviewed-by: Leif Lindholm (I have some comments for later in the thread, but they do not affect this patch.) / Leif > --- > Maintainers.txt | 53 ++--- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 51 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Maintainers.txt b/Maintainers.txt > index 3f40cdeb5554..2b03ccbe54aa 100644 > --- a/Maintainers.txt > +++ b/Maintainers.txt > @@ -93,7 +93,7 @@ M: Sami Mujawar [samimujawar] > RISCV64 > F: */RiscV64/ > M: Sunil V L [vlsunil] > -R: Daniel Schaefer [JohnAZoidberg] > +R: Andrei Warkentin [andreiw] > > LOONGARCH64 > F: */LoongArch64/ > @@ -157,16 +157,6 @@ R: Leif Lindholm > [leiflindholm] > R: Sami Mujawar [samimujawar] > R: Gerd Hoffmann [kraxel] > > -ArmVirtPkg: modules used on Xen > -F: ArmVirtPkg/ArmVirtXen.* > -F: ArmVirtPkg/Library/XenArmGenericTimerVirtCounterLib/ > -F: ArmVirtPkg/Library/XenVirtMemInfoLib/ > -F: ArmVirtPkg/PrePi/ > -F: ArmVirtPkg/XenAcpiPlatformDxe/ > -F: ArmVirtPkg/XenPlatformHasAcpiDtDxe/ > -F: ArmVirtPkg/XenioFdtDxe/ > -R: Julien Grall [jgrall] > - > BaseTools > F: BaseTools/ > W: https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/BaseTools > @@ -187,8 +177,7 @@ F: CryptoPkg/ > W: https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/CryptoPkg > M: Jiewen Yao [jyao1] > M: Yi Li [liyi77] > -R: Xiaoyu Lu [xiaoyuxlu] > -R: Guomin Jiang [guominjia] > +R: Wenxing Hou [Wenxing-hou] > > DynamicTablesPkg > F: DynamicTablesPkg/ > @@ -202,7 +191,6 @@ W: > https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/EmbeddedPkg > M: Leif Lindholm [leiflindholm] > M: Ard Biesheuvel [ardbiesheuvel] > M: Abner Chang [changab] > -R: Daniel Schaefer [JohnAZoidberg] > > EmulatorPkg > F: EmulatorPkg/ > @@ -228,7 +216,6 @@ F: FmpDevicePkg/ > W: https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/FmpDevicePkg > M: Liming Gao [lgao4] > M: Michael D Kinney [mdkinney] > -R: Guomin Jiang [guominjia] > R: Wei6 Xu [xuweiintel] > > IntelFsp2Pkg > @@ -237,7 +224,6 @@ W: > https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/IntelFsp2Pkg > M: Chasel Chiu [ChaselChiu] > M: Nate DeSimone [nate-desimone] > M: Duggapu Chinni B [cbduggap] > -M: Ray Han Lim Ng [rayhanlimng] > R: Star Zeng [lzeng14] > R: Ted Kuo [tedkuo1] > R: Ashraf Ali S [AshrafAliS] > @@ -258,7 +244,6 @@ R: Susovan Mohapatra > [susovanmohapatra] > MdeModulePkg > F: MdeModulePkg/ > W: https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/MdeModulePkg > -M: Jian J Wang [jwang36] > M: Liming Gao [lgao4] > > MdeModulePkg: ACPI modules > @@ -268,15 +253,6 @@ R: Zhiguang Liu [LiuZhiguang001] > R: Dandan Bi [dandanbi] > R: Liming Gao [lgao4] > > -MdeModulePkg: ACPI modules related to S3 > -F: MdeModulePkg/*LockBox*/ > -F: MdeModulePkg/Include/*BootScript*.h > -F: MdeModulePkg/Include/*LockBox*.h > -F: MdeModulePkg/Include/*S3*.h > -F: MdeModulePkg/Library/*S3*/ > -R: Hao A Wu [hwu25] > -R: Eric Dong [ydong10] > - > MdeModulePkg: BDS modules > F: MdeModulePkg/*BootManager*/ > F: MdeModulePkg/Include/Library/UefiBootManagerLib.h > @@ -326,7 +302,6 @@ F: MdeModulePkg/Library/DxeSecurityManagementLib/ > F: MdeModulePkg/Universal/PCD/ > F: MdeModulePkg/Universal/PlatformDriOverrideDxe/ > F: MdeModulePkg/Universal/SecurityStubDxe/SecurityStub.c > -R: Dandan Bi [dandanbi] > R: Liming Gao [lgao4] > > MdeModulePkg: Device and Peripheral modules > @@ -346,12 +321,10 @@ F: MdeModulePkg/Include/Ppi/StorageSecurityCommand.h > F: MdeModulePkg/Include/Protocol/Ps2Policy.h > F: Mde
Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on active community members
On 10/28/23 21:23, Michael D Kinney wrote: > Over the past few months, all the of the Maintainers and > Reviewers listed in Maintainers.txt have been contacted to make > sure Maintainers.txt accurately represents the TianoCore > community members that are actively participating in their > roles. Based on specific feedback, bounced emails, and no > responses, updates have been made. > > * RISCV64: Daniel Schaefer replaced with Andrei Warkentin > * ArmVirtPkg Xen has no remaining reviewers and review > responsibility defaults to ArmVirtPkg Maintainers/Reviewers. > * ACPI modules related to S3 has no remaining reviewers and > review responsibility defaults to MdeModulePkg Maintainers/ > Reviewers. > * OVMF CSM modules has no remaining reviewers and review > responsibility defaults to OvmfPkg Maintainers/Reviewers. > * Bounce: Chan Laura > * Many smaller updates removing individuals that are no > longer involved or have replacement coverage. > > Cc: Andrew Fish > Cc: Leif Lindholm > Cc: Andrei Warkentin > Cc: Catharine West > Cc: Dandan Bi > Cc: Daniel Schaefer > Cc: David Woodhouse > Cc: Debkumar De > Cc: Eric Dong > Cc: Guomin Jiang > Cc: Hao A Wu > Cc: James Bottomley > Cc: Jian J Wang > Cc: Jordan Justen > Cc: Julien Grall > Cc: Peter Grehan > Cc: Qi Zhang > Cc: Ray Han Lim Ng > Cc: Stefan Berger > Cc: Wenxing Hou > Cc: Xiaoyu Lu > Signed-off-by: Michael D Kinney > --- > Maintainers.txt | 53 ++--- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 51 deletions(-) FWIW: Reviewed-by: Laszlo Ersek Additionally, based on Mike's explanation down-thread, I'm proposing: - a follow-up patch to Maintainers.txt where we remove the "Orphan" status from the generic description, - filing three separate BZs, for the removal of OvmfPkg/Csm/, SignedCapsulePkg, and SourceLevelDebugPkg, respectively (where the latter two could be moved to edk2-platforms), - I'm happy to take on the OvmfPkg/Csm/ removal BZ. Laszlo -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#110395): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/110395 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/102245264/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/leave/9847357/21656/1706620634/xyzzy [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on active community members
On 10/30/23 23:18, Kinney, Michael D wrote: > Hi Laszlo, > > I do not support orphaned categories and that option should be > removed from Maintainer.txt. One of the motivations to get > Maintainers.txt updated is to work on the set of tasks related to > using GitHub PRs for code review. I see. I didn't know. So, the mailing list based review process is going away. > If a component is orphaned, > then nobody would be assigned to a PR in that area and the PR > would be stuck and would eventually be deleted for no activity. > A terrible experience for a submitter. I agree, although just because a PR is auto-assigned to reviewers, tehre is no guarantee that those reviewers will provide timely feedback. (The current, long response times on the list may have two reasons; one, reviewers missing patches (in spite of the direct CC's); two, reviewers not acting on the patches they are aware of. Reviewing PRs on GitHub may help with the former, but I'm doubtful it will help with the latter. Anyway, I'm not trying to object to the workflow change.) > If there is a feature for which there is no longer any support, > then I recommend we find a way to remove it from the head of the > repository. The feature is still available in the history and > in previous releases when it was supported. OK! > If there is a future need for the feature and there are those that > are willing to support it, it can always be resurrected from the > history. > > If it is a critical feature that will break the entire project > if it is removed, then we must find community members that are > willing to own it. > > The immediate backup for this scenario is the EDK II Stewards, but > They may not have the background on the specific feature to maintain > it well. For example, I am currently helping with the NetworkPkg > because there are no maintainers and I have been recruiting without > success. It's unfortunate that NetworkPkg has no dedicated maintainer; UEFI network boot (for example in OVMF guests) is certainly used in the industry. I'll try to help out with patch reviews for NetworkPkg as well. > I would like the see the SignedCapulePkg removed. There are a > couple platforms in edk2-platforms that depend on it. There is > another task to review the actively supported platforms in > edk2-platforms. If those platforms are removed, then SignedCapulsePkg > could be safely removed from the head of edk2. ... or else SignedCapulsePkg could be moved to edk2-platforms. (While I prefer to keep everything in one big tree, I agree that moving SignedCapulsePkg to edk2-platforms would be consistent with past subsystem movements.) > SourceLevelDebugPkg has a similar issues of no maintainers. The > platforms maintained in edk2 repo do not depend on it to do source > level debug. It is more of a physical platform debug capability. > Perhaps this feature should be moved to the edk2-platform. There > was a brief discuss at the UEFI Plugfest to update this debug > feature because the current one depends on very old tools. I'd even welcome that, as I see SOURCE_DEBUG_ENABLE an unnecessary (not functional) complication in the OVMF DSC files. OK, let us review the patch again from scratch, with these points in mind. Thanks Laszlo -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#110394): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/110394 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/102245264/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/leave/9847357/21656/1706620634/xyzzy [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on active community members
On 2023-10-28 12:23:30, Michael D Kinney wrote: > @@ -497,7 +463,6 @@ F: OvmfPkg/ > W: http://www.tianocore.org/ovmf/ > M: Ard Biesheuvel [ardbiesheuvel] > M: Jiewen Yao [jyao1] > -R: Jordan Justen [jljusten] > R: Gerd Hoffmann [kraxel] > S: Maintained Acked-by: Jordan Justen -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#110373): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/110373 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/102245264/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on active community members
Reviewed-by: Andrei Warkentin > -Original Message- > From: Kinney, Michael D > Sent: Saturday, October 28, 2023 2:24 PM > To: devel@edk2.groups.io > Cc: Andrew Fish ; Leif Lindholm > ; Warkentin, Andrei > ; West, Catharine ; > Bi, Dandan ; Daniel Schaefer > ; David Woodhouse ; De, > Debkumar ; Dong, Eric ; > Jiang, Guomin ; Wu, Hao A ; > James Bottomley ; Wang, Jian J > ; Justen, Jordan L ; Julien > Grall ; Peter Grehan ; Zhang, Qi1 > ; Ng, Ray Han Lim ; Stefan > Berger ; Hou, Wenxing ; > Lu, Xiaoyu1 > Subject: [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on active community > members > > Over the past few months, all the of the Maintainers and Reviewers listed in > Maintainers.txt have been contacted to make sure Maintainers.txt accurately > represents the TianoCore community members that are actively participating > in their roles. Based on specific feedback, bounced emails, and no > responses, updates have been made. > > * RISCV64: Daniel Schaefer replaced with Andrei Warkentin > * ArmVirtPkg Xen has no remaining reviewers and review > responsibility defaults to ArmVirtPkg Maintainers/Reviewers. > * ACPI modules related to S3 has no remaining reviewers and > review responsibility defaults to MdeModulePkg Maintainers/ > Reviewers. > * OVMF CSM modules has no remaining reviewers and review > responsibility defaults to OvmfPkg Maintainers/Reviewers. > * Bounce: Chan Laura > * Many smaller updates removing individuals that are no > longer involved or have replacement coverage. > > Cc: Andrew Fish > Cc: Leif Lindholm > Cc: Andrei Warkentin > Cc: Catharine West > Cc: Dandan Bi > Cc: Daniel Schaefer > Cc: David Woodhouse > Cc: Debkumar De > Cc: Eric Dong > Cc: Guomin Jiang > Cc: Hao A Wu > Cc: James Bottomley > Cc: Jian J Wang > Cc: Jordan Justen > Cc: Julien Grall > Cc: Peter Grehan > Cc: Qi Zhang > Cc: Ray Han Lim Ng > Cc: Stefan Berger > Cc: Wenxing Hou > Cc: Xiaoyu Lu > Signed-off-by: Michael D Kinney > --- > Maintainers.txt | 53 ++--- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 51 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Maintainers.txt b/Maintainers.txt index > 3f40cdeb5554..2b03ccbe54aa 100644 > --- a/Maintainers.txt > +++ b/Maintainers.txt > @@ -93,7 +93,7 @@ M: Sami Mujawar > [samimujawar] > RISCV64 > F: */RiscV64/ > M: Sunil V L [vlsunil] > -R: Daniel Schaefer [JohnAZoidberg] > +R: Andrei Warkentin [andreiw] > > LOONGARCH64 > F: */LoongArch64/ > @@ -157,16 +157,6 @@ R: Leif Lindholm > [leiflindholm] > R: Sami Mujawar [samimujawar] > R: Gerd Hoffmann [kraxel] > > -ArmVirtPkg: modules used on Xen > -F: ArmVirtPkg/ArmVirtXen.* > -F: ArmVirtPkg/Library/XenArmGenericTimerVirtCounterLib/ > -F: ArmVirtPkg/Library/XenVirtMemInfoLib/ > -F: ArmVirtPkg/PrePi/ > -F: ArmVirtPkg/XenAcpiPlatformDxe/ > -F: ArmVirtPkg/XenPlatformHasAcpiDtDxe/ > -F: ArmVirtPkg/XenioFdtDxe/ > -R: Julien Grall [jgrall] > - > BaseTools > F: BaseTools/ > W: https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/BaseTools > @@ -187,8 +177,7 @@ F: CryptoPkg/ > W: https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/CryptoPkg > M: Jiewen Yao [jyao1] > M: Yi Li [liyi77] > -R: Xiaoyu Lu [xiaoyuxlu] > -R: Guomin Jiang [guominjia] > +R: Wenxing Hou [Wenxing-hou] > > DynamicTablesPkg > F: DynamicTablesPkg/ > @@ -202,7 +191,6 @@ W: > https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/EmbeddedPkg > M: Leif Lindholm [leiflindholm] > M: Ard Biesheuvel [ardbiesheuvel] > M: Abner Chang [changab] > -R: Daniel Schaefer [JohnAZoidberg] > > EmulatorPkg > F: EmulatorPkg/ > @@ -228,7 +216,6 @@ F: FmpDevicePkg/ > W: https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/FmpDevicePkg > M: Liming Gao [lgao4] > M: Michael D Kinney [mdkinney] > -R: Guomin Jiang [guominjia] > R: Wei6 Xu [xuweiintel] > > IntelFsp2Pkg > @@ -237,7 +224,6 @@ W: > https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/IntelFsp2Pkg > M: Chasel Chiu [ChaselChiu] > M: Nate DeSimone [nate-desimone] > M: Duggapu Chinni B [cbduggap] > -M: Ray Han Lim Ng [rayhanlimng] > R: Star Zeng [lzeng14] > R: Ted Kuo [tedkuo1] > R: Ashraf Ali S [AshrafAliS] @@ -258,7 +244,6 @@ > R: Susovan Mohapatra [susovanmohapatra] > MdeModulePkg > F: MdeModulePkg/ > W: https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/MdeModulePkg > -M: Jian J Wang [jwang36] > M: Liming Gao [lgao4] > > MdeModulePkg: ACPI modules > @@ -268,15 +253,6 @@ R: Zhiguang Liu > [LiuZhiguang001] > R: Dandan Bi [dandanbi] > R: Liming Gao [lgao4] > > -MdeModulePkg: ACPI modules related to S3 > -F: MdeModulePkg/*LockBox*/ > -F: MdeModulePkg/Include/*BootScript*.h > -F: MdeModulePkg/Include/*LockBox*.h > -F: MdeModulePkg/Include/*S3*.h > -F: MdeModulePkg/Library/*S3*/ > -R: Hao A Wu [hwu25] > -R: Eric Dong [ydong10] > - > MdeModulePkg: BDS modules > F: MdeModulePkg/*BootManager*/ > F: MdeModulePkg/Include/Library/UefiBootManagerLib.h > @@ -326,7 +302,6 @@ F: > MdeModulePkg/Library/DxeSecur
Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on active community members
Hi Laszlo, I do not support orphaned categories and that option should be removed from Maintainer.txt. One of the motivations to get Maintainers.txt updated is to work on the set of tasks related to using GitHub PRs for code review. If a component is orphaned, then nobody would be assigned to a PR in that area and the PR would be stuck and would eventually be deleted for no activity. A terrible experience for a submitter. If there is a feature for which there is no longer any support, then I recommend we find a way to remove it from the head of the repository. The feature is still available in the history and in previous releases when it was supported. If there is a future need for the feature and there are those that are willing to support it, it can always be resurrected from the history. If it is a critical feature that will break the entire project if it is removed, then we must find community members that are willing to own it. The immediate backup for this scenario is the EDK II Stewards, but They may not have the background on the specific feature to maintain it well. For example, I am currently helping with the NetworkPkg because there are no maintainers and I have been recruiting without success. I would like the see the SignedCapulePkg removed. There are a couple platforms in edk2-platforms that depend on it. There is another task to review the actively supported platforms in edk2-platforms. If those platforms are removed, then SignedCapulsePkg could be safely removed from the head of edk2. SourceLevelDebugPkg has a similar issues of no maintainers. The platforms maintained in edk2 repo do not depend on it to do source level debug. It is more of a physical platform debug capability. Perhaps this feature should be moved to the edk2-platform. There was a brief discuss at the UEFI Plugfest to update this debug feature because the current one depends on very old tools. Mike > -Original Message- > From: Laszlo Ersek > Sent: Monday, October 30, 2023 4:29 AM > To: Kinney, Michael D ; Yao, Jiewen > ; devel@edk2.groups.io; pedro.falc...@gmail.com > Cc: Andrew Fish ; Leif Lindholm > ; Warkentin, Andrei > ; West, Catharine > ; Bi, Dandan ; Daniel > Schaefer ; David Woodhouse > ; De, Debkumar ; Dong, > Eric ; Jiang, Guomin ; > Wu, Hao A ; James Bottomley ; > Wang, Jian J ; Justen, Jordan L > ; Julien Grall ; Peter > Grehan ; Zhang, Qi1 ; Ng, Ray > Han Lim ; Stefan Berger > ; Hou, Wenxing ; Lu, > Xiaoyu1 > Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on > active community members > > On 10/30/23 06:31, Kinney, Michael D wrote: > > There is a very good discussion here on the roles and responsibility > > and potential suggestions for changes to the Wiki page that document > > those roles and responsibilities. > > > > May I suggest that someone start a new thread that discusses > > the proposed changes to the Wiki page and leave this thread for the > > review of the changes to Maintainers.txt? > > These are connected topics, but yes, back to "Maintainers.txt" -- do > you > feel that "S: Orphan" sections are acceptable in general? They're a > first (AFAICT) for edk2's "Maintainers.txt"; we've always had the > mechanism documented (since the creation of "Maintainers.txt", or so), > but we never seem to have put it to use. > > Laszlo -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#110345): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/110345 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/102245264/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/leave/9847357/21656/1706620634/xyzzy [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on active community members
For changes to item "> -M: Ray Han Lim Ng [rayhanlimng]": Reviewed-by: Ray Han Lim Ng -Original Message- From: Pedro Falcato Sent: Sunday, October 29, 2023 10:17 AM To: devel@edk2.groups.io; Kinney, Michael D Cc: Andrew Fish ; Leif Lindholm ; Warkentin, Andrei ; West, Catharine ; Bi, Dandan ; Daniel Schaefer ; David Woodhouse ; De, Debkumar ; Dong, Eric ; Jiang, Guomin ; Wu, Hao A ; James Bottomley ; Wang, Jian J ; Justen, Jordan L ; Julien Grall ; Peter Grehan ; Zhang, Qi1 ; Ng, Ray Han Lim ; Stefan Berger ; Hou, Wenxing ; Lu, Xiaoyu1 Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on active community members On Sat, Oct 28, 2023 at 8:23 PM Michael D Kinney wrote: > > Over the past few months, all the of the Maintainers and Reviewers > listed in Maintainers.txt have been contacted to make sure > Maintainers.txt accurately represents the TianoCore community members > that are actively participating in their roles. Based on specific > feedback, bounced emails, and no responses, updates have been made. > > * RISCV64: Daniel Schaefer replaced with Andrei Warkentin > * ArmVirtPkg Xen has no remaining reviewers and review > responsibility defaults to ArmVirtPkg Maintainers/Reviewers. > * ACPI modules related to S3 has no remaining reviewers and > review responsibility defaults to MdeModulePkg Maintainers/ > Reviewers. > * OVMF CSM modules has no remaining reviewers and review > responsibility defaults to OvmfPkg Maintainers/Reviewers. > * Bounce: Chan Laura > * Many smaller updates removing individuals that are no > longer involved or have replacement coverage. Mike, Thank you so much for doing this thankless task. Some comments: > diff --git a/Maintainers.txt b/Maintainers.txt index > 3f40cdeb5554..2b03ccbe54aa 100644 > --- a/Maintainers.txt > +++ b/Maintainers.txt > @@ -93,7 +93,7 @@ M: Sami Mujawar [samimujawar] > RISCV64 > F: */RiscV64/ > M: Sunil V L [vlsunil] > -R: Daniel Schaefer [JohnAZoidberg] > +R: Andrei Warkentin [andreiw] > > LOONGARCH64 > F: */LoongArch64/ > @@ -157,16 +157,6 @@ R: Leif Lindholm > [leiflindholm] > R: Sami Mujawar [samimujawar] > R: Gerd Hoffmann [kraxel] > > -ArmVirtPkg: modules used on Xen > -F: ArmVirtPkg/ArmVirtXen.* > -F: ArmVirtPkg/Library/XenArmGenericTimerVirtCounterLib/ > -F: ArmVirtPkg/Library/XenVirtMemInfoLib/ > -F: ArmVirtPkg/PrePi/ > -F: ArmVirtPkg/XenAcpiPlatformDxe/ > -F: ArmVirtPkg/XenPlatformHasAcpiDtDxe/ > -F: ArmVirtPkg/XenioFdtDxe/ > -R: Julien Grall [jgrall] ArmVirtPkg Xen modules seize to have a dedicated maintainer. Can the generic ArmVirtPkg maintainers handle *more code* (particularly, functionality that's not trivial to test, unless you actively use Xen)? > BaseTools > F: BaseTools/ > W: https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/BaseTools > @@ -187,8 +177,7 @@ F: CryptoPkg/ > W: https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/CryptoPkg > M: Jiewen Yao [jyao1] > M: Yi Li [liyi77] > -R: Xiaoyu Lu [xiaoyuxlu] > -R: Guomin Jiang [guominjia] > +R: Wenxing Hou [Wenxing-hou] > > DynamicTablesPkg > F: DynamicTablesPkg/ > @@ -202,7 +191,6 @@ W: > https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/EmbeddedPkg > M: Leif Lindholm [leiflindholm] > M: Ard Biesheuvel [ardbiesheuvel] > M: Abner Chang [changab] > -R: Daniel Schaefer [JohnAZoidberg] > > EmulatorPkg > F: EmulatorPkg/ > @@ -228,7 +216,6 @@ F: FmpDevicePkg/ > W: https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/FmpDevicePkg > M: Liming Gao [lgao4] > M: Michael D Kinney [mdkinney] > -R: Guomin Jiang [guominjia] > R: Wei6 Xu [xuweiintel] > > IntelFsp2Pkg > @@ -237,7 +224,6 @@ W: > https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/IntelFsp2Pkg > M: Chasel Chiu [ChaselChiu] > M: Nate DeSimone [nate-desimone] > M: Duggapu Chinni B [cbduggap] > -M: Ray Han Lim Ng [rayhanlimng] > R: Star Zeng [lzeng14] > R: Ted Kuo [tedkuo1] > R: Ashraf Ali S [AshrafAliS] @@ -258,7 > +244,6 @@ R: Susovan Mohapatra > [susovanmohapatra] MdeModulePkg > F: MdeModulePkg/ > W: https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/MdeModulePkg > -M: Jian J Wang [jwang36] > M: Liming Gao [lgao4] MdeModulePkg now only has a single maintainer (Liming, who also handles a myriad of other tasks and packages) > > MdeModulePkg: ACPI modules > @@ -268,15 +253,6 @@ R: Zhiguang Liu > [LiuZhiguang001] > R: Dandan Bi [dandanbi] > R: Liming Gao [lgao4] > > -MdeModulePkg: ACPI modules related to S3 > -F: MdeModulePkg/*LockBox*/ > -F: MdeModulePkg/Include/*BootScript*.h > -F: MdeModulePkg/Include/*LockBox*.h > -F: MdeModulePkg/Include/*S3*.h > -F
Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on active community members
On 10/30/23 06:31, Kinney, Michael D wrote: > There is a very good discussion here on the roles and responsibility > and potential suggestions for changes to the Wiki page that document > those roles and responsibilities. > > May I suggest that someone start a new thread that discusses > the proposed changes to the Wiki page and leave this thread for the > review of the changes to Maintainers.txt? These are connected topics, but yes, back to "Maintainers.txt" -- do you feel that "S: Orphan" sections are acceptable in general? They're a first (AFAICT) for edk2's "Maintainers.txt"; we've always had the mechanism documented (since the creation of "Maintainers.txt", or so), but we never seem to have put it to use. Laszlo -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#110311): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/110311 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/102245264/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/leave/9847357/21656/1706620634/xyzzy [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on active community members
On 10/29/23 20:01, Pedro Falcato wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 29, 2023 at 1:30 PM Laszlo Ersek wrote:
>>
>> On 10/29/23 03:16, Pedro Falcato wrote:
diff --git a/Maintainers.txt b/Maintainers.txt
index 3f40cdeb5554..2b03ccbe54aa 100644
--- a/Maintainers.txt
+++ b/Maintainers.txt
@@ -93,7 +93,7 @@ M: Sami Mujawar [samimujawar]
RISCV64
F: */RiscV64/
M: Sunil V L [vlsunil]
-R: Daniel Schaefer [JohnAZoidberg]
+R: Andrei Warkentin [andreiw]
LOONGARCH64
F: */LoongArch64/
@@ -157,16 +157,6 @@ R: Leif Lindholm
[leiflindholm]
R: Sami Mujawar [samimujawar]
R: Gerd Hoffmann [kraxel]
-ArmVirtPkg: modules used on Xen
-F: ArmVirtPkg/ArmVirtXen.*
-F: ArmVirtPkg/Library/XenArmGenericTimerVirtCounterLib/
-F: ArmVirtPkg/Library/XenVirtMemInfoLib/
-F: ArmVirtPkg/PrePi/
-F: ArmVirtPkg/XenAcpiPlatformDxe/
-F: ArmVirtPkg/XenPlatformHasAcpiDtDxe/
-F: ArmVirtPkg/XenioFdtDxe/
-R: Julien Grall [jgrall]
>>>
>>> ArmVirtPkg Xen modules seize to have a dedicated maintainer. Can the
>>> generic ArmVirtPkg maintainers handle *more code* (particularly,
>>> functionality that's not trivial to test, unless you actively use
>>> Xen)?
>>
>> An alternative to removing this entire section is to replace Julien's
>> line with the following status line:
>>
>> S: Orphan
>>
>> The definition in Maintainers.txt is:
>>
>> Orphan: No current maintainer [but maybe you could take the
>> role as you write your new code].
>>
>> I think this might be clearer for all three of: contributors, consumers,
>> and existent maintainers.
>>
>> - Contributors: An ArmVirtPkg maintainer may techincally merge your
>> code, but you won't get substantive feedback
>>
>> - Consumers: you can build and run this code, but if it breaks, you get
>> to keep both parts
>>
>> - Existent ArmVirtPkg maintainers: you can rest assured in the knowledge
>> that you are not saddled with deep technical reviews for this subsystem
>> that you can't even boot in your environment. You're only responsible
>> for the technical act of merging patches.
>
> I agree with this solution, but I do think there should be a "time
> limit" for orphaned code. You don't want to keep orphaned code for too
> long, this is not a practice we should support (which may lead to
> corporate code dumps where corps just dump a bunch of patches on the
> mailing list, fire and forget, and they're still "supported").
Very difficult question; there could be end-users relying on the feature
still, without anyone shouldering the maintenance costs :( I certainly
see your point, I just can't either agree *or* disagree with it!
(I recently cleaned up even *build* breakages in edk2-platforms; I also
found libraries that were not used *at all* by in-tree platforms. Those
obviously come from ancient corporate code-drops, and nobody must have
built them very recently, but if we remove them, we could still
ultimately harm end-users.)
[...]
>> This leads me to my main point: it may be time for edk2 to adopt a
>> leaner contribution process.
>>
>> We can insist on no patch going in without maintainer approval, but that
>> -- i.e., maintainer authority -- only works as long as it goes hand in
>> hand with maintainer responsibility: timely reviews. If the community
>> cannot offer enough working hours for reviewing patches for a subsystem,
>> then the requirements to contribute to that subsystem should be relaxed.
>> The other alternative is that the subsystem goes into stasis, where it
>> becomes effectively impossible to contribute to a subsystem.
>>
>> (NB this "relaxation of contribution rules" is entirely orthogonal to
>> using a mailing list vs. github pull requests. I still strongly prefer
>> the mailing list.)
>>
>> So maybe we could say, if there is no patch review for like 7 working
>> days (approx. one and half calendar weeks), then the patch should be
>> merged by default. Put differently, switch from "rejected by default" to
>> "accepted by default".
>
> I understand your idea. I do, however, see it going in 2 different ways:
> 1) This pressures maintainers/corporations to be faster at reviewing
> patches, keeping a smooth flow of careful, reviewed patches. Things
> continue to work smoothly.
> 2) Maintainers keep being unresponsive, patches get "auto merged" and
> people need to deal with any ensuing breakage. Things /may/ regularly
> break.
You are too polite; it's quite likely that things *will* break :)
> IMO, this solution does not solve anything. If maintainers are short
> on time (or simply spread too thin), they will still be short on time
> unless corps give them more time for FOSS work. This just adds a fear
> factor ("Complete shite may be automerged if you don't have people on
> it!!").
The alternative is stasis, as I wrote above. Everything grinds to a
halt, and people can't proceed with careful, justified work either.
The true sol
Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on active community members
Hi Michael, On 28/10/2023 20:23, Michael D Kinney wrote: Over the past few months, all the of the Maintainers and Reviewers listed in Maintainers.txt have been contacted to make sure Maintainers.txt accurately represents the TianoCore community members that are actively participating in their roles. Based on specific feedback, bounced emails, and no responses, updates have been made. * RISCV64: Daniel Schaefer replaced with Andrei Warkentin * ArmVirtPkg Xen has no remaining reviewers and review responsibility defaults to ArmVirtPkg Maintainers/Reviewers. * ACPI modules related to S3 has no remaining reviewers and review responsibility defaults to MdeModulePkg Maintainers/ Reviewers. * OVMF CSM modules has no remaining reviewers and review responsibility defaults to OvmfPkg Maintainers/Reviewers. * Bounce: Chan Laura * Many smaller updates removing individuals that are no longer involved or have replacement coverage. Cc: Andrew Fish Cc: Leif Lindholm Cc: Andrei Warkentin Cc: Catharine West Cc: Dandan Bi Cc: Daniel Schaefer Cc: David Woodhouse Cc: Debkumar De Cc: Eric Dong Cc: Guomin Jiang Cc: Hao A Wu Cc: James Bottomley Cc: Jian J Wang Cc: Jordan Justen Cc: Julien Grall Cc: Peter Grehan Cc: Qi Zhang Cc: Ray Han Lim Ng Cc: Stefan Berger Cc: Wenxing Hou Cc: Xiaoyu Lu Signed-off-by: Michael D Kinney --- Maintainers.txt | 53 ++--- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 51 deletions(-) diff --git a/Maintainers.txt b/Maintainers.txt index 3f40cdeb5554..2b03ccbe54aa 100644 --- a/Maintainers.txt +++ b/Maintainers.txt @@ -93,7 +93,7 @@ M: Sami Mujawar [samimujawar] RISCV64 F: */RiscV64/ M: Sunil V L [vlsunil] -R: Daniel Schaefer [JohnAZoidberg] +R: Andrei Warkentin [andreiw] LOONGARCH64 F: */LoongArch64/ @@ -157,16 +157,6 @@ R: Leif Lindholm [leiflindholm] R: Sami Mujawar [samimujawar] R: Gerd Hoffmann [kraxel] -ArmVirtPkg: modules used on Xen -F: ArmVirtPkg/ArmVirtXen.* -F: ArmVirtPkg/Library/XenArmGenericTimerVirtCounterLib/ -F: ArmVirtPkg/Library/XenVirtMemInfoLib/ -F: ArmVirtPkg/PrePi/ -F: ArmVirtPkg/XenAcpiPlatformDxe/ -F: ArmVirtPkg/XenPlatformHasAcpiDtDxe/ -F: ArmVirtPkg/XenioFdtDxe/ -R: Julien Grall [jgrall] - A few months ago, I have asked the Xen community if someone wanted to take over the responsibility. Unfortunately, no-one step up. So this seems to be the best approach: Acked-by: Julien Grall Cheers, -- Julien Grall -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#110306): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/110306 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/102245264/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on active community members
On 10/30/23 03:40, Yao, Jiewen wrote: > Thanks Mike. I am reading the WIKI page. > > >> and/or provides testing or regression testing for the Package (or some >> modules thereof), in certain platforms and environments. > > [Jiewen] Are we expecting Reviewer to provide testing or regression testing > for the package? > Is that what the reviewer *commits* to do? > For example, Maintainer may ask the reviewer to do some testing, right? It depends on the reviewer's individual commitment. First of all, the burden of testing / regression-testing, to a reasonable extent [1], is on the submitter. [1] In some cases, the submitter cannot test the code they modify in all possible environments / circumstances. In such cases, the submitter should test the change code wherever they can, as widely as they can, and be upfront (in the commit message) about lacking coverage in other environments they might be aware of. It is then fine for the maintainer (or even reviewer) to ask others for further / wider testing, but trying to saddle someone with that testing as an *obligation* will never fly. That would only alienate people from contributing. This was the primary reason for splitting Xen code as sharply as possible from non-Xen code in both ArmVirtPkg and OvmfPkg. Xen and QEMU/KVM are so different environments, with so distinct audiences, that keeping code common was *worse* than duplicating and customizing code. We could never *sufficiently* regression-test our changes for each other. It was best to separate those areas of interest. Demanding that I regression-test on Xen, or that Anthony or Julien regression-test on QEMU/KVM, would have lead nowhere. Second, the level of commitment varies. A reviewer may have a fleeting interest in a module (just want to be in the loop), or else they may be completely invested in it, and they might actually prefer being a maintainer. For example, I had seen many bad regressions in OVMF due to UefiCpuPkg patches, thus, even thouogh I absolutely didn't welcome the additional responsibility, I asked to be added as a Reviewer for UefiCpuPkg. With that, I wanted to formalize my request to be CC'd on all UefiCpuPkg patches, but I also committed to regression testing, and maybe even reviewing, those patches. It worked out quite well, but of course I was still selective in what I would review and test. If I could immediately determine that the patch modified code in UefiCpuPkg that never ran on (or wasn't even built into) OVMF, I would clearly state on the list that I'd not review or test the patch, i.e., that nobody should wait for me. > > >> Reviewer is responsible for timely responses on emails addressed to them >> (preferably less than calendar week). > > [Jiewen] > Is that what the reviewer *commits* to do? What I think we can expect a reviewer to *commit* to is to say *something* reasonably quickly. The whole idea is to support others in making a *decision*, in making progress. So the "something" the reviewer says may well be: - "this does not apply to the area I have expertise or interest in, so please proceed with this patch without my feedback (testing or review or opinion etc)" - "I don't have time for this right now, so please go ahead; if it breaks, we'll figure it out later" (the maintainer need not accept this, and might want to block the patch independently for a bit longer, until someone else provides the desired review or testing, but the reviewer is still totally OK to say this) - "please give me a few more days to review this set". > For example, Maintainer may ask the reviewer to provide feedback, right? IMO, the maintainer is welcome to request feedback, of course; that's presumably why the reviewer wanted to be listed in Maintainers.txt in the first place. Laszlo -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#110305): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/110305 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/102245264/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/leave/9847357/21656/1706620634/xyzzy [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on active community members
For changes to item "Hao A Wu [hwu25]": Reviewed-by: Hao A Wu Best Regards, Hao Wu > -Original Message- > From: Kinney, Michael D > Sent: Sunday, October 29, 2023 3:24 AM > To: devel@edk2.groups.io > Cc: Andrew Fish ; Leif Lindholm > ; Warkentin, Andrei > ; West, Catharine > ; Bi, Dandan ; Daniel > Schaefer ; David Woodhouse > ; De, Debkumar ; Dong, > Eric ; Jiang, Guomin ; Wu, > Hao A ; James Bottomley ; > Wang, Jian J ; Justen, Jordan L > ; Julien Grall ; Peter Grehan > ; Zhang, Qi1 ; Ng, Ray Han Lim > ; Stefan Berger ; Hou, > Wenxing ; Lu, Xiaoyu1 > Subject: [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on active community > members > > Over the past few months, all the of the Maintainers and Reviewers listed in > Maintainers.txt have been contacted to make sure Maintainers.txt accurately > represents the TianoCore community members that are actively participating > in their roles. Based on specific feedback, bounced emails, and no responses, > updates have been made. > > * RISCV64: Daniel Schaefer replaced with Andrei Warkentin > * ArmVirtPkg Xen has no remaining reviewers and review > responsibility defaults to ArmVirtPkg Maintainers/Reviewers. > * ACPI modules related to S3 has no remaining reviewers and > review responsibility defaults to MdeModulePkg Maintainers/ > Reviewers. > * OVMF CSM modules has no remaining reviewers and review > responsibility defaults to OvmfPkg Maintainers/Reviewers. > * Bounce: Chan Laura > * Many smaller updates removing individuals that are no > longer involved or have replacement coverage. > > Cc: Andrew Fish > Cc: Leif Lindholm > Cc: Andrei Warkentin > Cc: Catharine West > Cc: Dandan Bi > Cc: Daniel Schaefer > Cc: David Woodhouse > Cc: Debkumar De > Cc: Eric Dong > Cc: Guomin Jiang > Cc: Hao A Wu > Cc: James Bottomley > Cc: Jian J Wang > Cc: Jordan Justen > Cc: Julien Grall > Cc: Peter Grehan > Cc: Qi Zhang > Cc: Ray Han Lim Ng > Cc: Stefan Berger > Cc: Wenxing Hou > Cc: Xiaoyu Lu > Signed-off-by: Michael D Kinney > --- > Maintainers.txt | 53 ++--- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 51 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Maintainers.txt b/Maintainers.txt index > 3f40cdeb5554..2b03ccbe54aa 100644 > --- a/Maintainers.txt > +++ b/Maintainers.txt > @@ -93,7 +93,7 @@ M: Sami Mujawar > [samimujawar] > RISCV64 > F: */RiscV64/ > M: Sunil V L [vlsunil] > -R: Daniel Schaefer [JohnAZoidberg] > +R: Andrei Warkentin [andreiw] > > LOONGARCH64 > F: */LoongArch64/ > @@ -157,16 +157,6 @@ R: Leif Lindholm > [leiflindholm] > R: Sami Mujawar [samimujawar] > R: Gerd Hoffmann [kraxel] > > -ArmVirtPkg: modules used on Xen > -F: ArmVirtPkg/ArmVirtXen.* > -F: ArmVirtPkg/Library/XenArmGenericTimerVirtCounterLib/ > -F: ArmVirtPkg/Library/XenVirtMemInfoLib/ > -F: ArmVirtPkg/PrePi/ > -F: ArmVirtPkg/XenAcpiPlatformDxe/ > -F: ArmVirtPkg/XenPlatformHasAcpiDtDxe/ > -F: ArmVirtPkg/XenioFdtDxe/ > -R: Julien Grall [jgrall] > - > BaseTools > F: BaseTools/ > W: https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/BaseTools > @@ -187,8 +177,7 @@ F: CryptoPkg/ > W: https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/CryptoPkg > M: Jiewen Yao [jyao1] > M: Yi Li [liyi77] > -R: Xiaoyu Lu [xiaoyuxlu] > -R: Guomin Jiang [guominjia] > +R: Wenxing Hou [Wenxing-hou] > > DynamicTablesPkg > F: DynamicTablesPkg/ > @@ -202,7 +191,6 @@ W: > https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/EmbeddedPkg > M: Leif Lindholm [leiflindholm] > M: Ard Biesheuvel [ardbiesheuvel] > M: Abner Chang [changab] > -R: Daniel Schaefer [JohnAZoidberg] > > EmulatorPkg > F: EmulatorPkg/ > @@ -228,7 +216,6 @@ F: FmpDevicePkg/ > W: https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/FmpDevicePkg > M: Liming Gao [lgao4] > M: Michael D Kinney [mdkinney] > -R: Guomin Jiang [guominjia] > R: Wei6 Xu [xuweiintel] > > IntelFsp2Pkg > @@ -237,7 +224,6 @@ W: > https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/IntelFsp2Pkg > M: Chasel Chiu [ChaselChiu] > M: Nate DeSimone [nate-desimone] > M: Duggapu Chinni B [cbduggap] > -M: Ray Han Lim Ng [rayhanlimng] > R: Star Zeng [lzeng14] > R: Ted Kuo [tedkuo1] > R: Ashraf Ali S [AshrafAliS] @@ -258,7 +244,6 @@ > R: Susovan Mohapatra [susovanmohapatra] > MdeModulePkg > F: MdeModulePkg/ > W: https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/MdeModulePkg > -M: Jian J Wang [jwang36] > M: Liming Gao [lgao4] > > MdeModulePkg: ACPI modules > @@ -268,15 +253,6 @@ R: Zhiguang Liu > [LiuZhiguang001] > R: Dandan Bi [dandanbi] > R: Liming Gao [lgao4] > > -MdeModulePkg: ACPI modules related to S3 > -F: MdeModulePkg/*LockBox*/ > -F: MdeModulePkg/Include/*BootScript*.h > -F: MdeModulePkg/Include/*LockBox*.h > -F: MdeModulePkg/Include/*S3*.h > -F: MdeModulePkg/Library/*S3*/ > -R: Hao A Wu [hwu25] > -R: Eric Dong [ydong10] > - > MdeModulePkg: BDS modules > F: MdeModulePkg/*BootManager*/ > F: MdeModulePkg/Include/Library/UefiBootManagerLib.h > @
Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on active community members
There is a very good discussion here on the roles and responsibility and potential suggestions for changes to the Wiki page that document those roles and responsibilities. May I suggest that someone start a new thread that discusses the proposed changes to the Wiki page and leave this thread for the review of the changes to Maintainers.txt? Thanks, Mike > -Original Message- > From: Yao, Jiewen > Sent: Sunday, October 29, 2023 7:54 PM > To: devel@edk2.groups.io; ler...@redhat.com; pedro.falc...@gmail.com; > Kinney, Michael D > Cc: Andrew Fish ; Leif Lindholm > ; Warkentin, Andrei > ; West, Catharine > ; Bi, Dandan ; Daniel > Schaefer ; David Woodhouse > ; De, Debkumar ; Dong, > Eric ; Jiang, Guomin ; > Wu, Hao A ; James Bottomley ; > Wang, Jian J ; Justen, Jordan L > ; Julien Grall ; Peter > Grehan ; Zhang, Qi1 ; Ng, Ray > Han Lim ; Stefan Berger > ; Hou, Wenxing ; Lu, > Xiaoyu1 > Subject: RE: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on > active community members > > > I'll re-raise my point about relaxing the contribution conditions > too -- > > given this state, I'd propose a "merge by default" approach, with a > > reasonable timeout. > > [Jiewen] Yes. I agree this approach. > A reasonable timeout seems enough to allow people to think and > feedback. > > > > Also, I would like to propose another the contribution condition > relax. > > Currently, our agreed condition to merge is: > 1) Reviewed-by from Maintainer. > 2) Acked-by from Maintainer + Reviewed-by from Reviewer > > I propose to change the second condition: > 2) Acked-by from Maintainer + Reviewed-by from anyone who can be > trusted by the maintainer. > > > That is based upon the current situation - anyone can be a reviewer > just because they want to be CCed and has no expectation to review the > code. > Restricting R-B from a reviewer does not make sense to me. > > Thank you > Yao, Jiewen > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: devel@edk2.groups.io On Behalf Of > Laszlo Ersek > > Sent: Sunday, October 29, 2023 9:30 PM > > To: devel@edk2.groups.io; pedro.falc...@gmail.com; Kinney, Michael D > > > > Cc: Andrew Fish ; Leif Lindholm > ; > > Warkentin, Andrei ; West, Catharine > > ; Bi, Dandan ; Daniel > > Schaefer ; David Woodhouse > ; > > De, Debkumar ; Dong, Eric > ; > > Jiang, Guomin ; Wu, Hao A > ; > > James Bottomley ; Wang, Jian J > ; > > Justen, Jordan L ; Julien Grall > ; > > Peter Grehan ; Zhang, Qi1 ; > Ng, > > Ray Han Lim ; Stefan Berger > > ; Hou, Wenxing ; Lu, > Xiaoyu1 > > > > Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based > on active > > community members > > > > On 10/29/23 03:16, Pedro Falcato wrote: > > > On Sat, Oct 28, 2023 at 8:23 PM Michael D Kinney > > > wrote: > > >> > > >> Over the past few months, all the of the Maintainers and > > >> Reviewers listed in Maintainers.txt have been contacted to make > > >> sure Maintainers.txt accurately represents the TianoCore > > >> community members that are actively participating in their > > >> roles. Based on specific feedback, bounced emails, and no > > >> responses, updates have been made. > > >> > > >> * RISCV64: Daniel Schaefer replaced with Andrei Warkentin > > >> * ArmVirtPkg Xen has no remaining reviewers and review > > >> responsibility defaults to ArmVirtPkg Maintainers/Reviewers. > > >> * ACPI modules related to S3 has no remaining reviewers and > > >> review responsibility defaults to MdeModulePkg Maintainers/ > > >> Reviewers. > > >> * OVMF CSM modules has no remaining reviewers and review > > >> responsibility defaults to OvmfPkg Maintainers/Reviewers. > > >> * Bounce: Chan Laura > > >> * Many smaller updates removing individuals that are no > > >> longer involved or have replacement coverage. > > > > > > Mike, > > > > > > Thank you so much for doing this thankless task. Some comments: > > > > > >> diff --git a/Maintainers.txt b/Maintainers.txt > > >> index 3f40cdeb5554..2b03ccbe54aa 100644 > > >> --- a/Maintainers.txt > > >> +++ b/Maintainers.txt > > >> @@ -93,7 +93,7 @@ M: Sami Mujawar > > [samimujawar] > > >> RISCV64 > > >> F: */RiscV64/ > > >> M: Sunil V L [vlsunil] > > >> -R: Daniel Schaefer [JohnAZoidberg] > >
Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on active community members
On 10/29/23 5:23 AM, Michael D Kinney wrote: Over the past few months, all the of the Maintainers and Reviewers listed in Maintainers.txt have been contacted to make sure Maintainers.txt accurately represents the TianoCore community members that are actively participating in their roles. Based on specific feedback, bounced emails, and no responses, updates have been made. * RISCV64: Daniel Schaefer replaced with Andrei Warkentin * ArmVirtPkg Xen has no remaining reviewers and review responsibility defaults to ArmVirtPkg Maintainers/Reviewers. * ACPI modules related to S3 has no remaining reviewers and review responsibility defaults to MdeModulePkg Maintainers/ Reviewers. * OVMF CSM modules has no remaining reviewers and review responsibility defaults to OvmfPkg Maintainers/Reviewers. * Bounce: Chan Laura * Many smaller updates removing individuals that are no longer involved or have replacement coverage. Cc: Andrew Fish Cc: Leif Lindholm Cc: Andrei Warkentin Cc: Catharine West Cc: Dandan Bi Cc: Daniel Schaefer Cc: David Woodhouse Cc: Debkumar De Cc: Eric Dong Cc: Guomin Jiang Cc: Hao A Wu Cc: James Bottomley Cc: Jian J Wang Cc: Jordan Justen Cc: Julien Grall Cc: Peter Grehan Cc: Qi Zhang Cc: Ray Han Lim Ng Cc: Stefan Berger Cc: Wenxing Hou Cc: Xiaoyu Lu Signed-off-by: Michael D Kinney ... Reviewed-by: Peter Grehan -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#110287): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/110287 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/102245264/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on active community members
> I'll re-raise my point about relaxing the contribution conditions too -- > given this state, I'd propose a "merge by default" approach, with a > reasonable timeout. [Jiewen] Yes. I agree this approach. A reasonable timeout seems enough to allow people to think and feedback. Also, I would like to propose another the contribution condition relax. Currently, our agreed condition to merge is: 1) Reviewed-by from Maintainer. 2) Acked-by from Maintainer + Reviewed-by from Reviewer I propose to change the second condition: 2) Acked-by from Maintainer + Reviewed-by from anyone who can be trusted by the maintainer. That is based upon the current situation - anyone can be a reviewer just because they want to be CCed and has no expectation to review the code. Restricting R-B from a reviewer does not make sense to me. Thank you Yao, Jiewen > -Original Message- > From: devel@edk2.groups.io On Behalf Of Laszlo Ersek > Sent: Sunday, October 29, 2023 9:30 PM > To: devel@edk2.groups.io; pedro.falc...@gmail.com; Kinney, Michael D > > Cc: Andrew Fish ; Leif Lindholm ; > Warkentin, Andrei ; West, Catharine > ; Bi, Dandan ; Daniel > Schaefer ; David Woodhouse ; > De, Debkumar ; Dong, Eric ; > Jiang, Guomin ; Wu, Hao A ; > James Bottomley ; Wang, Jian J ; > Justen, Jordan L ; Julien Grall ; > Peter Grehan ; Zhang, Qi1 ; Ng, > Ray Han Lim ; Stefan Berger > ; Hou, Wenxing ; Lu, Xiaoyu1 > > Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on active > community members > > On 10/29/23 03:16, Pedro Falcato wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 28, 2023 at 8:23 PM Michael D Kinney > > wrote: > >> > >> Over the past few months, all the of the Maintainers and > >> Reviewers listed in Maintainers.txt have been contacted to make > >> sure Maintainers.txt accurately represents the TianoCore > >> community members that are actively participating in their > >> roles. Based on specific feedback, bounced emails, and no > >> responses, updates have been made. > >> > >> * RISCV64: Daniel Schaefer replaced with Andrei Warkentin > >> * ArmVirtPkg Xen has no remaining reviewers and review > >> responsibility defaults to ArmVirtPkg Maintainers/Reviewers. > >> * ACPI modules related to S3 has no remaining reviewers and > >> review responsibility defaults to MdeModulePkg Maintainers/ > >> Reviewers. > >> * OVMF CSM modules has no remaining reviewers and review > >> responsibility defaults to OvmfPkg Maintainers/Reviewers. > >> * Bounce: Chan Laura > >> * Many smaller updates removing individuals that are no > >> longer involved or have replacement coverage. > > > > Mike, > > > > Thank you so much for doing this thankless task. Some comments: > > > >> diff --git a/Maintainers.txt b/Maintainers.txt > >> index 3f40cdeb5554..2b03ccbe54aa 100644 > >> --- a/Maintainers.txt > >> +++ b/Maintainers.txt > >> @@ -93,7 +93,7 @@ M: Sami Mujawar > [samimujawar] > >> RISCV64 > >> F: */RiscV64/ > >> M: Sunil V L [vlsunil] > >> -R: Daniel Schaefer [JohnAZoidberg] > >> +R: Andrei Warkentin [andreiw] > >> > >> LOONGARCH64 > >> F: */LoongArch64/ > >> @@ -157,16 +157,6 @@ R: Leif Lindholm > [leiflindholm] > >> R: Sami Mujawar [samimujawar] > >> R: Gerd Hoffmann [kraxel] > >> > >> -ArmVirtPkg: modules used on Xen > >> -F: ArmVirtPkg/ArmVirtXen.* > >> -F: ArmVirtPkg/Library/XenArmGenericTimerVirtCounterLib/ > >> -F: ArmVirtPkg/Library/XenVirtMemInfoLib/ > >> -F: ArmVirtPkg/PrePi/ > >> -F: ArmVirtPkg/XenAcpiPlatformDxe/ > >> -F: ArmVirtPkg/XenPlatformHasAcpiDtDxe/ > >> -F: ArmVirtPkg/XenioFdtDxe/ > >> -R: Julien Grall [jgrall] > > > > ArmVirtPkg Xen modules seize to have a dedicated maintainer. Can the > > generic ArmVirtPkg maintainers handle *more code* (particularly, > > functionality that's not trivial to test, unless you actively use > > Xen)? > > An alternative to removing this entire section is to replace Julien's > line with the following status line: > > S: Orphan > > The definition in Maintainers.txt is: > > Orphan: No current maintainer [but maybe you could take the > role as you write your new code]. > > I think this might be clearer for all three of: contributors, consumers, > and existent maintainers. > > - Contributors: An ArmVirtPkg maintainer may techincally merge your > code, but you won't get substantive feedback > > - Consumers: y
Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on active community members
Thanks Mike. I am reading the WIKI page. > and/or provides testing or regression testing for the Package (or some > modules thereof), in certain platforms and environments. [Jiewen] Are we expecting Reviewer to provide testing or regression testing for the package? Is that what the reviewer *commits* to do? For example, Maintainer may ask the reviewer to do some testing, right? > Reviewer is responsible for timely responses on emails addressed to them > (preferably less than calendar week). [Jiewen] Is that what the reviewer *commits* to do? For example, Maintainer may ask the reviewer to provide feedback, right? Those are more than just CCed. Thank you Yao, Jiewen > -Original Message- > From: Kinney, Michael D > Sent: Monday, October 30, 2023 1:23 AM > To: Yao, Jiewen ; j...@linux.ibm.com; Laszlo Ersek > ; devel@edk2.groups.io; pedro.falc...@gmail.com > Cc: Andrew Fish ; Leif Lindholm ; > Warkentin, Andrei ; West, Catharine > ; Bi, Dandan ; Daniel > Schaefer ; David Woodhouse ; > De, Debkumar ; Dong, Eric ; > Jiang, Guomin ; Wu, Hao A ; > Wang, Jian J ; Justen, Jordan L > ; Julien Grall ; Peter Grehan > ; Zhang, Qi1 ; Ng, Ray Han Lim > ; Stefan Berger ; Hou, > Wenxing ; Lu, Xiaoyu1 ; > Kinney, Michael D > Subject: RE: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on active > community members > > This is the Wiki page where TianoCore documents the TianoCore community > member roles. > > https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/TianoCore-Who-we-are > > We can update/edit as needed to accurately reflect what all the Maintainers > and Reviewers agree are their roles and responsibilities as assigned in > Maintainers.txt. > > Thanks, > > Mike > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Yao, Jiewen > > Sent: Sunday, October 29, 2023 9:26 AM > > To: j...@linux.ibm.com; Laszlo Ersek ; > > devel@edk2.groups.io; pedro.falc...@gmail.com; Kinney, Michael D > > > > Cc: Andrew Fish ; Leif Lindholm > > ; Warkentin, Andrei > > ; West, Catharine > > ; Bi, Dandan ; Daniel > > Schaefer ; David Woodhouse > > ; De, Debkumar ; Dong, > > Eric ; Jiang, Guomin ; > > Wu, Hao A ; Wang, Jian J ; > > Justen, Jordan L ; Julien Grall > > ; Peter Grehan ; Zhang, Qi1 > > ; Ng, Ray Han Lim ; > > Stefan Berger ; Hou, Wenxing > > ; Lu, Xiaoyu1 > > Subject: RE: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on > > active community members > > > > OK. Maintainer should do code review. I have no doubt on that. > > > > My confusion is about "reviewer" role. What is criteria and what is > > responsibility? > > > > Are you saying that "reviewer" just means that someone raised the hand > > and said: "I want to be notified", and there is no expectation that > > he/she would review the patch? > > > > I would like to understand more on how that works and what that means. > > Would you please give a URL for the reviewer definition in Linux > > Kernel? > > > > Thank you > > Yao, Jiewen > > > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: James Bottomley > > > Sent: Monday, October 30, 2023 12:02 AM > > > To: Yao, Jiewen ; Laszlo Ersek > > ; > > > devel@edk2.groups.io; pedro.falc...@gmail.com; Kinney, Michael D > > > > > > Cc: Andrew Fish ; Leif Lindholm > > ; > > > Warkentin, Andrei ; West, Catharine > > > ; Bi, Dandan ; Daniel > > > Schaefer ; David Woodhouse > > ; > > > De, Debkumar ; Dong, Eric > > ; > > > Jiang, Guomin ; Wu, Hao A > > ; > > > Wang, Jian J ; Justen, Jordan L > > > ; Julien Grall ; Peter > > Grehan > > > ; Zhang, Qi1 ; Ng, Ray Han > > Lim > > > ; Stefan Berger ; > > Hou, > > > Wenxing ; Lu, Xiaoyu1 > > > Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based > > on active > > > community members > > > > > > On Sun, 2023-10-29 at 15:42 +, Yao, Jiewen wrote: > > > > > I'd say that's pretty close. A reviewer role is a request for > > > > > keeping > > > > > the reviewer in the loop. > > > > > > > > [Jiewen] I am disappointed on that. > > > > To me, that is NOT a real reviewer. See below description on what > > is > > > > "code review". > > > > https://google.github.io/eng-practices/review/ > > > > https://about.gitlab.com/topics/version-control/what-is-code- > > review/ > > >
Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on active community members
On 10/28/23 15:23, Michael D Kinney wrote: Over the past few months, all the of the Maintainers and Reviewers listed in Maintainers.txt have been contacted to make sure Maintainers.txt accurately represents the TianoCore community members that are actively participating in their roles. Based on specific feedback, bounced emails, and no responses, updates have been made. * RISCV64: Daniel Schaefer replaced with Andrei Warkentin * ArmVirtPkg Xen has no remaining reviewers and review responsibility defaults to ArmVirtPkg Maintainers/Reviewers. * ACPI modules related to S3 has no remaining reviewers and review responsibility defaults to MdeModulePkg Maintainers/ Reviewers. * OVMF CSM modules has no remaining reviewers and review responsibility defaults to OvmfPkg Maintainers/Reviewers. * Bounce: Chan Laura * Many smaller updates removing individuals that are no longer involved or have replacement coverage. Cc: Andrew Fish Cc: Leif Lindholm Cc: Andrei Warkentin Cc: Catharine West Cc: Dandan Bi Cc: Daniel Schaefer Cc: David Woodhouse Cc: Debkumar De Cc: Eric Dong Cc: Guomin Jiang Cc: Hao A Wu Cc: James Bottomley Cc: Jian J Wang Cc: Jordan Justen Cc: Julien Grall Cc: Peter Grehan Cc: Qi Zhang Cc: Ray Han Lim Ng Cc: Stefan Berger Cc: Wenxing Hou Cc: Xiaoyu Lu Signed-off-by: Michael D Kinney Reviewed-by: Stefan Berger -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#110278): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/110278 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/102245264/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on active community members
On Sun, Oct 29, 2023 at 1:30 PM Laszlo Ersek wrote: > > On 10/29/23 03:16, Pedro Falcato wrote: > >> diff --git a/Maintainers.txt b/Maintainers.txt > >> index 3f40cdeb5554..2b03ccbe54aa 100644 > >> --- a/Maintainers.txt > >> +++ b/Maintainers.txt > >> @@ -93,7 +93,7 @@ M: Sami Mujawar [samimujawar] > >> RISCV64 > >> F: */RiscV64/ > >> M: Sunil V L [vlsunil] > >> -R: Daniel Schaefer [JohnAZoidberg] > >> +R: Andrei Warkentin [andreiw] > >> > >> LOONGARCH64 > >> F: */LoongArch64/ > >> @@ -157,16 +157,6 @@ R: Leif Lindholm > >> [leiflindholm] > >> R: Sami Mujawar [samimujawar] > >> R: Gerd Hoffmann [kraxel] > >> > >> -ArmVirtPkg: modules used on Xen > >> -F: ArmVirtPkg/ArmVirtXen.* > >> -F: ArmVirtPkg/Library/XenArmGenericTimerVirtCounterLib/ > >> -F: ArmVirtPkg/Library/XenVirtMemInfoLib/ > >> -F: ArmVirtPkg/PrePi/ > >> -F: ArmVirtPkg/XenAcpiPlatformDxe/ > >> -F: ArmVirtPkg/XenPlatformHasAcpiDtDxe/ > >> -F: ArmVirtPkg/XenioFdtDxe/ > >> -R: Julien Grall [jgrall] > > > > ArmVirtPkg Xen modules seize to have a dedicated maintainer. Can the > > generic ArmVirtPkg maintainers handle *more code* (particularly, > > functionality that's not trivial to test, unless you actively use > > Xen)? > > An alternative to removing this entire section is to replace Julien's > line with the following status line: > > S: Orphan > > The definition in Maintainers.txt is: > > Orphan: No current maintainer [but maybe you could take the > role as you write your new code]. > > I think this might be clearer for all three of: contributors, consumers, > and existent maintainers. > > - Contributors: An ArmVirtPkg maintainer may techincally merge your > code, but you won't get substantive feedback > > - Consumers: you can build and run this code, but if it breaks, you get > to keep both parts > > - Existent ArmVirtPkg maintainers: you can rest assured in the knowledge > that you are not saddled with deep technical reviews for this subsystem > that you can't even boot in your environment. You're only responsible > for the technical act of merging patches. I agree with this solution, but I do think there should be a "time limit" for orphaned code. You don't want to keep orphaned code for too long, this is not a practice we should support (which may lead to corporate code dumps where corps just dump a bunch of patches on the mailing list, fire and forget, and they're still "supported"). > > > > >> BaseTools > >> F: BaseTools/ > >> W: https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/BaseTools > >> @@ -187,8 +177,7 @@ F: CryptoPkg/ > >> W: https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/CryptoPkg > >> M: Jiewen Yao [jyao1] > >> M: Yi Li [liyi77] > >> -R: Xiaoyu Lu [xiaoyuxlu] > >> -R: Guomin Jiang [guominjia] > >> +R: Wenxing Hou [Wenxing-hou] > >> > >> DynamicTablesPkg > >> F: DynamicTablesPkg/ > >> @@ -202,7 +191,6 @@ W: > >> https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/EmbeddedPkg > >> M: Leif Lindholm [leiflindholm] > >> M: Ard Biesheuvel [ardbiesheuvel] > >> M: Abner Chang [changab] > >> -R: Daniel Schaefer [JohnAZoidberg] > >> > >> EmulatorPkg > >> F: EmulatorPkg/ > >> @@ -228,7 +216,6 @@ F: FmpDevicePkg/ > >> W: https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/FmpDevicePkg > >> M: Liming Gao [lgao4] > >> M: Michael D Kinney [mdkinney] > >> -R: Guomin Jiang [guominjia] > >> R: Wei6 Xu [xuweiintel] > >> > >> IntelFsp2Pkg > >> @@ -237,7 +224,6 @@ W: > >> https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/IntelFsp2Pkg > >> M: Chasel Chiu [ChaselChiu] > >> M: Nate DeSimone [nate-desimone] > >> M: Duggapu Chinni B [cbduggap] > >> -M: Ray Han Lim Ng [rayhanlimng] > >> R: Star Zeng [lzeng14] > >> R: Ted Kuo [tedkuo1] > >> R: Ashraf Ali S [AshrafAliS] > >> @@ -258,7 +244,6 @@ R: Susovan Mohapatra > >> [susovanmohapatra] > >> MdeModulePkg > >> F: MdeModulePkg/ > >> W: https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/MdeModulePkg > >> -M: Jian J Wang [jwang36] > >> M: Liming Gao [lgao4] > > > > MdeModulePkg now only has a single maintainer (Liming, who also > > handles a myriad of other tasks and packages) > > This leads me to my main point: it may be time for edk2 to adopt a > leaner contribution process. > > We can insist on no patch going in without maintainer approval, but that > -- i.e., maintainer authority -- only works as long as it goes hand in > hand with maintainer responsibility: timely reviews. If the community > cannot offer enough working hours for reviewing patches for a subsystem, > then the requirements to contribute to that subsystem should be relaxed. > The other alternative is that the subsystem goes into stasis, where it > becomes effectively impossible to contribute to a subsystem. > > (NB this "relaxation of contribution rules" is entirely orthogonal to > using a mailing list vs. github pull requests. I still strongly prefer > the mailing list.) > > So maybe we could say, if there is no patch revi
Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on active community members
On Sun, Oct 29, 2023 at 4:25 PM Yao, Jiewen wrote: > > OK. Maintainer should do code review. I have no doubt on that. > > My confusion is about "reviewer" role. What is criteria and what is > responsibility? > > Are you saying that "reviewer" just means that someone raised the hand and > said: "I want to be notified", and there is no expectation that he/she would > review the patch? > > I would like to understand more on how that works and what that means. The Linux development process, as I understand it (it may be a bit imprecise, AFAIK lots of it isn't written): Maintainers are the primary caretakers of the code. They'll review and merge patches (in linux, they usually add their own Signed-off-by, they don't do Reviewed-by). Sometimes, they'll post a patch on the mailing list, and if there's no poor feedback, they just merge it to their trees, unilaterally (for Linux, Linus usually pulls from maintainer trees, and if he doesn't like something he *will* tell you). Reviewers are people that want to be CC'd and want to review patches, but they're not expected to always do so. There's of course an expectation that reviewers are relatively competent in the area they're reviewing. There's an expectation that you will help out and participate in code review from time to time. As an example: SLAB ALLOCATOR M: Christoph Lameter M: Pekka Enberg M: David Rientjes M: Joonsoo Kim M: Andrew Morton M: Vlastimil Babka R: Roman Gushchin R: Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hye...@gmail.com> L: linux...@kvack.org S: Maintained T: git git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/vbabka/slab.git F: include/linux/sl?b*.h F: mm/sl?b* For a patch for mm/slab.c, you CC all M's and R's. Maintainers are the one with the 'power' to merge it, and should give you feedback. Reviewers sometimes help out (but are secondary in the patch review role), but they cannot merge patches. You only merge a patch if there's an understanding that most people and stakeholders are ok with it; for example, you may want feedback from people that are not M's and R's. If everyone is ok with your patch, a maintainer will apply it (in this case, it's vbabka's tree so he usually takes care of it), and it will eventually trickle up to Linus (who manages the 'master' git tree) who gives the final seal of approval when pulling changes. For a smaller example, we can look at EFI, which has a sole maintainer (Ard) and no reviewers; this is ok (EFI is a lot less central to the kernel than SLAB, there are a lot less patches), but stakeholders in the various changes should still test and review. This is a nice rough description of the whole development process: https://docs.kernel.org/process/2.Process.html Note that EDK2 is considerably smaller than the kernel in scope and patch volume, so it probably doesn't make much sense to be as distributed as Linux. PS: It's worth noting that the Linux equivalent to GetMaintainers.py takes into account the git blame of the files you're touching, terms you mention in the commit message; that is, it will automatically pick up people that have touched the code before or are responsible for features you're interacting with. -- Pedro -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#110273): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/110273 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/102245264/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on active community members
This is the Wiki page where TianoCore documents the TianoCore community member roles. https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/TianoCore-Who-we-are We can update/edit as needed to accurately reflect what all the Maintainers and Reviewers agree are their roles and responsibilities as assigned in Maintainers.txt. Thanks, Mike > -Original Message- > From: Yao, Jiewen > Sent: Sunday, October 29, 2023 9:26 AM > To: j...@linux.ibm.com; Laszlo Ersek ; > devel@edk2.groups.io; pedro.falc...@gmail.com; Kinney, Michael D > > Cc: Andrew Fish ; Leif Lindholm > ; Warkentin, Andrei > ; West, Catharine > ; Bi, Dandan ; Daniel > Schaefer ; David Woodhouse > ; De, Debkumar ; Dong, > Eric ; Jiang, Guomin ; > Wu, Hao A ; Wang, Jian J ; > Justen, Jordan L ; Julien Grall > ; Peter Grehan ; Zhang, Qi1 > ; Ng, Ray Han Lim ; > Stefan Berger ; Hou, Wenxing > ; Lu, Xiaoyu1 > Subject: RE: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on > active community members > > OK. Maintainer should do code review. I have no doubt on that. > > My confusion is about "reviewer" role. What is criteria and what is > responsibility? > > Are you saying that "reviewer" just means that someone raised the hand > and said: "I want to be notified", and there is no expectation that > he/she would review the patch? > > I would like to understand more on how that works and what that means. > Would you please give a URL for the reviewer definition in Linux > Kernel? > > Thank you > Yao, Jiewen > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: James Bottomley > > Sent: Monday, October 30, 2023 12:02 AM > > To: Yao, Jiewen ; Laszlo Ersek > ; > > devel@edk2.groups.io; pedro.falc...@gmail.com; Kinney, Michael D > > > > Cc: Andrew Fish ; Leif Lindholm > ; > > Warkentin, Andrei ; West, Catharine > > ; Bi, Dandan ; Daniel > > Schaefer ; David Woodhouse > ; > > De, Debkumar ; Dong, Eric > ; > > Jiang, Guomin ; Wu, Hao A > ; > > Wang, Jian J ; Justen, Jordan L > > ; Julien Grall ; Peter > Grehan > > ; Zhang, Qi1 ; Ng, Ray Han > Lim > > ; Stefan Berger ; > Hou, > > Wenxing ; Lu, Xiaoyu1 > > Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based > on active > > community members > > > > On Sun, 2023-10-29 at 15:42 +, Yao, Jiewen wrote: > > > > I'd say that's pretty close. A reviewer role is a request for > > > > keeping > > > > the reviewer in the loop. > > > > > > [Jiewen] I am disappointed on that. > > > To me, that is NOT a real reviewer. See below description on what > is > > > "code review". > > > https://google.github.io/eng-practices/review/ > > > https://about.gitlab.com/topics/version-control/what-is-code- > review/ > > > > Well, that's what someone's view of what a patch review should > consist > > of, not what a reviewer's role in MAINTAINERS should be. > > > > In general, you really don't want to force people to review patches, > > because you'd like a reviewer to be familiar with the area and > > comfortable with the patch. So are you saying that anyone listed as > a > > reviewer in a particular area should be capable of reviewing any > patch? > > and further that they should be expected to review every patch? > > Because that's definitely not what the R role in the Linux Kernel > would > > mean. > > > > I know that's not what happened to me in Confidential Computing, > > because I had a very specific area around SEV and SEV-ES secret > > injection and really had no familiarity at all with say the memory > > acceptance patches. > > > > > Our definition seems more like *a notification receiver*, instead > of > > > a real code reviewer. I would say, it is a very misleading > > > definition. > > > > Actually, I wouldn't, but then I'm more coming from a Linux Kernel > > background. To us, the reviewer list is simply a list of people git > > blame might not find who might have the expertise to review the > patch > > but on whom there would be no expectation that they would review the > > patch. > > > > James -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#110272): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/110272 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/102245264/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/leave/9847357/21656/1706620634/xyzzy [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on active community members
OK. Maintainer should do code review. I have no doubt on that. My confusion is about "reviewer" role. What is criteria and what is responsibility? Are you saying that "reviewer" just means that someone raised the hand and said: "I want to be notified", and there is no expectation that he/she would review the patch? I would like to understand more on how that works and what that means. Would you please give a URL for the reviewer definition in Linux Kernel? Thank you Yao, Jiewen > -Original Message- > From: James Bottomley > Sent: Monday, October 30, 2023 12:02 AM > To: Yao, Jiewen ; Laszlo Ersek ; > devel@edk2.groups.io; pedro.falc...@gmail.com; Kinney, Michael D > > Cc: Andrew Fish ; Leif Lindholm ; > Warkentin, Andrei ; West, Catharine > ; Bi, Dandan ; Daniel > Schaefer ; David Woodhouse ; > De, Debkumar ; Dong, Eric ; > Jiang, Guomin ; Wu, Hao A ; > Wang, Jian J ; Justen, Jordan L > ; Julien Grall ; Peter Grehan > ; Zhang, Qi1 ; Ng, Ray Han Lim > ; Stefan Berger ; Hou, > Wenxing ; Lu, Xiaoyu1 > Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on active > community members > > On Sun, 2023-10-29 at 15:42 +, Yao, Jiewen wrote: > > > I'd say that's pretty close. A reviewer role is a request for > > > keeping > > > the reviewer in the loop. > > > > [Jiewen] I am disappointed on that. > > To me, that is NOT a real reviewer. See below description on what is > > "code review". > > https://google.github.io/eng-practices/review/ > > https://about.gitlab.com/topics/version-control/what-is-code-review/ > > Well, that's what someone's view of what a patch review should consist > of, not what a reviewer's role in MAINTAINERS should be. > > In general, you really don't want to force people to review patches, > because you'd like a reviewer to be familiar with the area and > comfortable with the patch. So are you saying that anyone listed as a > reviewer in a particular area should be capable of reviewing any patch? > and further that they should be expected to review every patch? > Because that's definitely not what the R role in the Linux Kernel would > mean. > > I know that's not what happened to me in Confidential Computing, > because I had a very specific area around SEV and SEV-ES secret > injection and really had no familiarity at all with say the memory > acceptance patches. > > > Our definition seems more like *a notification receiver*, instead of > > a real code reviewer. I would say, it is a very misleading > > definition. > > Actually, I wouldn't, but then I'm more coming from a Linux Kernel > background. To us, the reviewer list is simply a list of people git > blame might not find who might have the expertise to review the patch > but on whom there would be no expectation that they would review the > patch. > > James -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#110271): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/110271 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/102245264/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on active community members
On Sun, 2023-10-29 at 15:42 +, Yao, Jiewen wrote: > > I'd say that's pretty close. A reviewer role is a request for > > keeping > > the reviewer in the loop. > > [Jiewen] I am disappointed on that. > To me, that is NOT a real reviewer. See below description on what is > "code review". > https://google.github.io/eng-practices/review/ > https://about.gitlab.com/topics/version-control/what-is-code-review/ Well, that's what someone's view of what a patch review should consist of, not what a reviewer's role in MAINTAINERS should be. In general, you really don't want to force people to review patches, because you'd like a reviewer to be familiar with the area and comfortable with the patch. So are you saying that anyone listed as a reviewer in a particular area should be capable of reviewing any patch? and further that they should be expected to review every patch? Because that's definitely not what the R role in the Linux Kernel would mean. I know that's not what happened to me in Confidential Computing, because I had a very specific area around SEV and SEV-ES secret injection and really had no familiarity at all with say the memory acceptance patches. > Our definition seems more like *a notification receiver*, instead of > a real code reviewer. I would say, it is a very misleading > definition. Actually, I wouldn't, but then I'm more coming from a Linux Kernel background. To us, the reviewer list is simply a list of people git blame might not find who might have the expertise to review the patch but on whom there would be no expectation that they would review the patch. James -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#110270): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/110270 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/102245264/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on active community members
> I'd say that's pretty close. A reviewer role is a request for keeping > the reviewer in the loop. [Jiewen] I am disappointed on that. To me, that is NOT a real reviewer. See below description on what is "code review". https://google.github.io/eng-practices/review/ https://about.gitlab.com/topics/version-control/what-is-code-review/ Our definition seems more like *a notification receiver*, instead of a real code reviewer. I would say, it is a very misleading definition. Thank you Yao, Jiewen > -Original Message- > From: Laszlo Ersek > Sent: Sunday, October 29, 2023 9:48 PM > To: devel@edk2.groups.io; Yao, Jiewen ; > pedro.falc...@gmail.com; Kinney, Michael D > Cc: Andrew Fish ; Leif Lindholm ; > Warkentin, Andrei ; West, Catharine > ; Bi, Dandan ; Daniel > Schaefer ; David Woodhouse ; > De, Debkumar ; Dong, Eric ; > Jiang, Guomin ; Wu, Hao A ; > James Bottomley ; Wang, Jian J ; > Justen, Jordan L ; Julien Grall ; > Peter Grehan ; Zhang, Qi1 ; Ng, > Ray Han Lim ; Stefan Berger > ; Hou, Wenxing ; Lu, Xiaoyu1 > > Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on active > community members > > On 10/29/23 09:05, Yao, Jiewen wrote: > > Those are great questions. I also would like to understand: > > > > 1) What is definition of "actively participating in their roles"? > > Here are the definitions of Maintainer and Reviewer, from > "Maintainers.txt": > > M: Package Maintainer: Cc address for patches and questions. Responsible > for reviewing and pushing package changes to source control. > R: Package Reviewer: Cc address for patches and questions. Reviewers help > maintainers review code, but don't have push access. A designated Package > Reviewer is reasonably familiar with the Package (or some modules > thereof), and/or provides testing or regression testing for the Package > (or some modules thereof), in certain platforms and environments. > > > Is there any enforcement or just volunteer work? > > I see the Maintainer role as a service to the community, with some > benefits granted in return. The "service" part should be clear. The > benefit is that you are kept in the loop, and sometimes (when you must) > you *can* say "no". (According to some seasoned reviewers, the one real > power of a maintainer -- not to be abused! -- is "saying no".) A > maintainer that's present helps set the focus, keep regressions out, > gives advice when needed, and so on. > > Enforcement would be nice (haha), but it never works. You can't force > people to help, especially if their dayjob instructions oppose their > upstream community responsibilities. That's fine; in such cases my > request is always: if you can't help, then at least don't get in the > way, step down. Don't block people from doing their work by having them > wait for your feedback. > > So volunteer work is fine, but as soon as the position grows "fangs" (= > a capacity to make others wait), then it becomes a promise, a > responsibility. > > > > > 2) What is role and *responsibility* of Reviewer role? Is it > > documented somewhere? > > Per my observation, some assigned reviewers have never reviewed any > > patch in history or provided valuable feedback. To me, reviewer role > > seems more like a notification instead of really review something. Is > > that our purpose? > > I'd say that's pretty close. A reviewer role is a request for keeping > the reviewer in the loop. Maintainers tend to appreciate that, because a > long-term reviewer may provide good insights, test results, and so on. > Trust is super important; a maintainer may push a patch based solely on > a reviewer's positive feedback, due to the latter's experience. > > > While Laszlo contributed a lots in Tianocore community, he is really a > > good "reviewer", although he has no such title. > > Thanks for the acknowledgement, I appreciate it! > > I don't like to hoard titles. I'm sure titles are good for one's career, > but I always see the *promise* (the responsibility) to the community, > first and foremost, that a title encapsulates. It weighs heavily on me. > I loathe disappointing people. For me, not to bear a title is better > than to bear it and not to deliver on it / not to live up to it. > > Laszlo -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#110269): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/110269 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/102245264/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on active community members
On 10/29/23 14:48, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > I loathe disappointing people. English is a tricky language. The above landed as an (unintended) double-entendre. I meant: "I hate to disappoint people". I didn't mean: "I loathe people that are disappointing". Ouch. Laszlo -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#110261): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/110261 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/102245264/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/leave/9847357/21656/1706620634/xyzzy [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on active community members
On 10/29/23 09:05, Yao, Jiewen wrote: > Those are great questions. I also would like to understand: > > 1) What is definition of "actively participating in their roles"? Here are the definitions of Maintainer and Reviewer, from "Maintainers.txt": M: Package Maintainer: Cc address for patches and questions. Responsible for reviewing and pushing package changes to source control. R: Package Reviewer: Cc address for patches and questions. Reviewers help maintainers review code, but don't have push access. A designated Package Reviewer is reasonably familiar with the Package (or some modules thereof), and/or provides testing or regression testing for the Package (or some modules thereof), in certain platforms and environments. > Is there any enforcement or just volunteer work? I see the Maintainer role as a service to the community, with some benefits granted in return. The "service" part should be clear. The benefit is that you are kept in the loop, and sometimes (when you must) you *can* say "no". (According to some seasoned reviewers, the one real power of a maintainer -- not to be abused! -- is "saying no".) A maintainer that's present helps set the focus, keep regressions out, gives advice when needed, and so on. Enforcement would be nice (haha), but it never works. You can't force people to help, especially if their dayjob instructions oppose their upstream community responsibilities. That's fine; in such cases my request is always: if you can't help, then at least don't get in the way, step down. Don't block people from doing their work by having them wait for your feedback. So volunteer work is fine, but as soon as the position grows "fangs" (= a capacity to make others wait), then it becomes a promise, a responsibility. > > 2) What is role and *responsibility* of Reviewer role? Is it > documented somewhere? > Per my observation, some assigned reviewers have never reviewed any > patch in history or provided valuable feedback. To me, reviewer role > seems more like a notification instead of really review something. Is > that our purpose? I'd say that's pretty close. A reviewer role is a request for keeping the reviewer in the loop. Maintainers tend to appreciate that, because a long-term reviewer may provide good insights, test results, and so on. Trust is super important; a maintainer may push a patch based solely on a reviewer's positive feedback, due to the latter's experience. > While Laszlo contributed a lots in Tianocore community, he is really a > good "reviewer", although he has no such title. Thanks for the acknowledgement, I appreciate it! I don't like to hoard titles. I'm sure titles are good for one's career, but I always see the *promise* (the responsibility) to the community, first and foremost, that a title encapsulates. It weighs heavily on me. I loathe disappointing people. For me, not to bear a title is better than to bear it and not to deliver on it / not to live up to it. Laszlo -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#110259): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/110259 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/102245264/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/leave/9847357/21656/1706620634/xyzzy [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on active community members
On 10/29/23 03:16, Pedro Falcato wrote: > On Sat, Oct 28, 2023 at 8:23 PM Michael D Kinney > wrote: >> >> Over the past few months, all the of the Maintainers and >> Reviewers listed in Maintainers.txt have been contacted to make >> sure Maintainers.txt accurately represents the TianoCore >> community members that are actively participating in their >> roles. Based on specific feedback, bounced emails, and no >> responses, updates have been made. >> >> * RISCV64: Daniel Schaefer replaced with Andrei Warkentin >> * ArmVirtPkg Xen has no remaining reviewers and review >> responsibility defaults to ArmVirtPkg Maintainers/Reviewers. >> * ACPI modules related to S3 has no remaining reviewers and >> review responsibility defaults to MdeModulePkg Maintainers/ >> Reviewers. >> * OVMF CSM modules has no remaining reviewers and review >> responsibility defaults to OvmfPkg Maintainers/Reviewers. >> * Bounce: Chan Laura >> * Many smaller updates removing individuals that are no >> longer involved or have replacement coverage. > > Mike, > > Thank you so much for doing this thankless task. Some comments: > >> diff --git a/Maintainers.txt b/Maintainers.txt >> index 3f40cdeb5554..2b03ccbe54aa 100644 >> --- a/Maintainers.txt >> +++ b/Maintainers.txt >> @@ -93,7 +93,7 @@ M: Sami Mujawar [samimujawar] >> RISCV64 >> F: */RiscV64/ >> M: Sunil V L [vlsunil] >> -R: Daniel Schaefer [JohnAZoidberg] >> +R: Andrei Warkentin [andreiw] >> >> LOONGARCH64 >> F: */LoongArch64/ >> @@ -157,16 +157,6 @@ R: Leif Lindholm >> [leiflindholm] >> R: Sami Mujawar [samimujawar] >> R: Gerd Hoffmann [kraxel] >> >> -ArmVirtPkg: modules used on Xen >> -F: ArmVirtPkg/ArmVirtXen.* >> -F: ArmVirtPkg/Library/XenArmGenericTimerVirtCounterLib/ >> -F: ArmVirtPkg/Library/XenVirtMemInfoLib/ >> -F: ArmVirtPkg/PrePi/ >> -F: ArmVirtPkg/XenAcpiPlatformDxe/ >> -F: ArmVirtPkg/XenPlatformHasAcpiDtDxe/ >> -F: ArmVirtPkg/XenioFdtDxe/ >> -R: Julien Grall [jgrall] > > ArmVirtPkg Xen modules seize to have a dedicated maintainer. Can the > generic ArmVirtPkg maintainers handle *more code* (particularly, > functionality that's not trivial to test, unless you actively use > Xen)? An alternative to removing this entire section is to replace Julien's line with the following status line: S: Orphan The definition in Maintainers.txt is: Orphan: No current maintainer [but maybe you could take the role as you write your new code]. I think this might be clearer for all three of: contributors, consumers, and existent maintainers. - Contributors: An ArmVirtPkg maintainer may techincally merge your code, but you won't get substantive feedback - Consumers: you can build and run this code, but if it breaks, you get to keep both parts - Existent ArmVirtPkg maintainers: you can rest assured in the knowledge that you are not saddled with deep technical reviews for this subsystem that you can't even boot in your environment. You're only responsible for the technical act of merging patches. > >> BaseTools >> F: BaseTools/ >> W: https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/BaseTools >> @@ -187,8 +177,7 @@ F: CryptoPkg/ >> W: https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/CryptoPkg >> M: Jiewen Yao [jyao1] >> M: Yi Li [liyi77] >> -R: Xiaoyu Lu [xiaoyuxlu] >> -R: Guomin Jiang [guominjia] >> +R: Wenxing Hou [Wenxing-hou] >> >> DynamicTablesPkg >> F: DynamicTablesPkg/ >> @@ -202,7 +191,6 @@ W: >> https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/EmbeddedPkg >> M: Leif Lindholm [leiflindholm] >> M: Ard Biesheuvel [ardbiesheuvel] >> M: Abner Chang [changab] >> -R: Daniel Schaefer [JohnAZoidberg] >> >> EmulatorPkg >> F: EmulatorPkg/ >> @@ -228,7 +216,6 @@ F: FmpDevicePkg/ >> W: https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/FmpDevicePkg >> M: Liming Gao [lgao4] >> M: Michael D Kinney [mdkinney] >> -R: Guomin Jiang [guominjia] >> R: Wei6 Xu [xuweiintel] >> >> IntelFsp2Pkg >> @@ -237,7 +224,6 @@ W: >> https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/IntelFsp2Pkg >> M: Chasel Chiu [ChaselChiu] >> M: Nate DeSimone [nate-desimone] >> M: Duggapu Chinni B [cbduggap] >> -M: Ray Han Lim Ng [rayhanlimng] >> R: Star Zeng [lzeng14] >> R: Ted Kuo [tedkuo1] >> R: Ashraf Ali S [AshrafAliS] >> @@ -258,7 +244,6 @@ R: Susovan Mohapatra >> [susovanmohapatra] >> MdeModulePkg >> F: MdeModulePkg/ >> W: https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/MdeModulePkg >> -M: Jian J Wang [jwang36] >> M: Liming Gao [lgao4] > > MdeModulePkg now only has a single maintainer (Liming, who also > handles a myriad of other tasks and packages) This leads me to my main point: it may be time for edk2 to adopt a leaner contribution process. We can insist on no patch going in without maintainer approval, but that -- i.e., maintainer authority -- only works as long as it goes hand in hand with maintainer responsibility: timely reviews. If the community cannot offer enough working h
Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on active community members
Those are great questions. I also would like to understand: 1) What is definition of "actively participating in their roles"? Is there any enforcement or just volunteer work? 2) What is role and *responsibility* of Reviewer role? Is it documented somewhere? Per my observation, some assigned reviewers have never reviewed any patch in history or provided valuable feedback. To me, reviewer role seems more like a notification instead of really review something. Is that our purpose? While Laszlo contributed a lots in Tianocore community, he is really a good "reviewer", although he has no such title. Thank you Yao, Jiewen > -Original Message- > From: devel@edk2.groups.io On Behalf Of Pedro Falcato > Sent: Sunday, October 29, 2023 10:17 AM > To: devel@edk2.groups.io; Kinney, Michael D > Cc: Andrew Fish ; Leif Lindholm ; > Warkentin, Andrei ; West, Catharine > ; Bi, Dandan ; Daniel > Schaefer ; David Woodhouse ; > De, Debkumar ; Dong, Eric ; > Jiang, Guomin ; Wu, Hao A ; > James Bottomley ; Wang, Jian J ; > Justen, Jordan L ; Julien Grall ; > Peter Grehan ; Zhang, Qi1 ; Ng, > Ray Han Lim ; Stefan Berger > ; Hou, Wenxing ; Lu, Xiaoyu1 > > Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on active > community members > > On Sat, Oct 28, 2023 at 8:23 PM Michael D Kinney > wrote: > > > > Over the past few months, all the of the Maintainers and > > Reviewers listed in Maintainers.txt have been contacted to make > > sure Maintainers.txt accurately represents the TianoCore > > community members that are actively participating in their > > roles. Based on specific feedback, bounced emails, and no > > responses, updates have been made. > > > > * RISCV64: Daniel Schaefer replaced with Andrei Warkentin > > * ArmVirtPkg Xen has no remaining reviewers and review > > responsibility defaults to ArmVirtPkg Maintainers/Reviewers. > > * ACPI modules related to S3 has no remaining reviewers and > > review responsibility defaults to MdeModulePkg Maintainers/ > > Reviewers. > > * OVMF CSM modules has no remaining reviewers and review > > responsibility defaults to OvmfPkg Maintainers/Reviewers. > > * Bounce: Chan Laura > > * Many smaller updates removing individuals that are no > > longer involved or have replacement coverage. > > Mike, > > Thank you so much for doing this thankless task. Some comments: > > > diff --git a/Maintainers.txt b/Maintainers.txt > > index 3f40cdeb5554..2b03ccbe54aa 100644 > > --- a/Maintainers.txt > > +++ b/Maintainers.txt > > @@ -93,7 +93,7 @@ M: Sami Mujawar > [samimujawar] > > RISCV64 > > F: */RiscV64/ > > M: Sunil V L [vlsunil] > > -R: Daniel Schaefer [JohnAZoidberg] > > +R: Andrei Warkentin [andreiw] > > > > LOONGARCH64 > > F: */LoongArch64/ > > @@ -157,16 +157,6 @@ R: Leif Lindholm > [leiflindholm] > > R: Sami Mujawar [samimujawar] > > R: Gerd Hoffmann [kraxel] > > > > -ArmVirtPkg: modules used on Xen > > -F: ArmVirtPkg/ArmVirtXen.* > > -F: ArmVirtPkg/Library/XenArmGenericTimerVirtCounterLib/ > > -F: ArmVirtPkg/Library/XenVirtMemInfoLib/ > > -F: ArmVirtPkg/PrePi/ > > -F: ArmVirtPkg/XenAcpiPlatformDxe/ > > -F: ArmVirtPkg/XenPlatformHasAcpiDtDxe/ > > -F: ArmVirtPkg/XenioFdtDxe/ > > -R: Julien Grall [jgrall] > > ArmVirtPkg Xen modules seize to have a dedicated maintainer. Can the > generic ArmVirtPkg maintainers handle *more code* (particularly, > functionality that's not trivial to test, unless you actively use > Xen)? > > > BaseTools > > F: BaseTools/ > > W: https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/BaseTools > > @@ -187,8 +177,7 @@ F: CryptoPkg/ > > W: https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/CryptoPkg > > M: Jiewen Yao [jyao1] > > M: Yi Li [liyi77] > > -R: Xiaoyu Lu [xiaoyuxlu] > > -R: Guomin Jiang [guominjia] > > +R: Wenxing Hou [Wenxing-hou] > > > > DynamicTablesPkg > > F: DynamicTablesPkg/ > > @@ -202,7 +191,6 @@ W: > https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/EmbeddedPkg > > M: Leif Lindholm [leiflindholm] > > M: Ard Biesheuvel [ardbiesheuvel] > > M: Abner Chang [changab] > > -R: Daniel Schaefer [JohnAZoidberg] > > > > EmulatorPkg > > F: EmulatorPkg/ > > @@ -228,7 +216,6 @@ F: FmpDevicePkg/ > > W: https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/FmpDevicePkg > > M: Liming Gao [lgao4] > > M: Michael D Kinney [mdkinney] > > -R: Guomin Jiang [guominjia] > > R: Wei6 Xu [xuweiintel] > > > > Intel
Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on active community members
On Sat, Oct 28, 2023 at 8:23 PM Michael D Kinney wrote: > > Over the past few months, all the of the Maintainers and > Reviewers listed in Maintainers.txt have been contacted to make > sure Maintainers.txt accurately represents the TianoCore > community members that are actively participating in their > roles. Based on specific feedback, bounced emails, and no > responses, updates have been made. > > * RISCV64: Daniel Schaefer replaced with Andrei Warkentin > * ArmVirtPkg Xen has no remaining reviewers and review > responsibility defaults to ArmVirtPkg Maintainers/Reviewers. > * ACPI modules related to S3 has no remaining reviewers and > review responsibility defaults to MdeModulePkg Maintainers/ > Reviewers. > * OVMF CSM modules has no remaining reviewers and review > responsibility defaults to OvmfPkg Maintainers/Reviewers. > * Bounce: Chan Laura > * Many smaller updates removing individuals that are no > longer involved or have replacement coverage. Mike, Thank you so much for doing this thankless task. Some comments: > diff --git a/Maintainers.txt b/Maintainers.txt > index 3f40cdeb5554..2b03ccbe54aa 100644 > --- a/Maintainers.txt > +++ b/Maintainers.txt > @@ -93,7 +93,7 @@ M: Sami Mujawar [samimujawar] > RISCV64 > F: */RiscV64/ > M: Sunil V L [vlsunil] > -R: Daniel Schaefer [JohnAZoidberg] > +R: Andrei Warkentin [andreiw] > > LOONGARCH64 > F: */LoongArch64/ > @@ -157,16 +157,6 @@ R: Leif Lindholm > [leiflindholm] > R: Sami Mujawar [samimujawar] > R: Gerd Hoffmann [kraxel] > > -ArmVirtPkg: modules used on Xen > -F: ArmVirtPkg/ArmVirtXen.* > -F: ArmVirtPkg/Library/XenArmGenericTimerVirtCounterLib/ > -F: ArmVirtPkg/Library/XenVirtMemInfoLib/ > -F: ArmVirtPkg/PrePi/ > -F: ArmVirtPkg/XenAcpiPlatformDxe/ > -F: ArmVirtPkg/XenPlatformHasAcpiDtDxe/ > -F: ArmVirtPkg/XenioFdtDxe/ > -R: Julien Grall [jgrall] ArmVirtPkg Xen modules seize to have a dedicated maintainer. Can the generic ArmVirtPkg maintainers handle *more code* (particularly, functionality that's not trivial to test, unless you actively use Xen)? > BaseTools > F: BaseTools/ > W: https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/BaseTools > @@ -187,8 +177,7 @@ F: CryptoPkg/ > W: https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/CryptoPkg > M: Jiewen Yao [jyao1] > M: Yi Li [liyi77] > -R: Xiaoyu Lu [xiaoyuxlu] > -R: Guomin Jiang [guominjia] > +R: Wenxing Hou [Wenxing-hou] > > DynamicTablesPkg > F: DynamicTablesPkg/ > @@ -202,7 +191,6 @@ W: > https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/EmbeddedPkg > M: Leif Lindholm [leiflindholm] > M: Ard Biesheuvel [ardbiesheuvel] > M: Abner Chang [changab] > -R: Daniel Schaefer [JohnAZoidberg] > > EmulatorPkg > F: EmulatorPkg/ > @@ -228,7 +216,6 @@ F: FmpDevicePkg/ > W: https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/FmpDevicePkg > M: Liming Gao [lgao4] > M: Michael D Kinney [mdkinney] > -R: Guomin Jiang [guominjia] > R: Wei6 Xu [xuweiintel] > > IntelFsp2Pkg > @@ -237,7 +224,6 @@ W: > https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/IntelFsp2Pkg > M: Chasel Chiu [ChaselChiu] > M: Nate DeSimone [nate-desimone] > M: Duggapu Chinni B [cbduggap] > -M: Ray Han Lim Ng [rayhanlimng] > R: Star Zeng [lzeng14] > R: Ted Kuo [tedkuo1] > R: Ashraf Ali S [AshrafAliS] > @@ -258,7 +244,6 @@ R: Susovan Mohapatra > [susovanmohapatra] > MdeModulePkg > F: MdeModulePkg/ > W: https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/MdeModulePkg > -M: Jian J Wang [jwang36] > M: Liming Gao [lgao4] MdeModulePkg now only has a single maintainer (Liming, who also handles a myriad of other tasks and packages) > > MdeModulePkg: ACPI modules > @@ -268,15 +253,6 @@ R: Zhiguang Liu [LiuZhiguang001] > R: Dandan Bi [dandanbi] > R: Liming Gao [lgao4] > > -MdeModulePkg: ACPI modules related to S3 > -F: MdeModulePkg/*LockBox*/ > -F: MdeModulePkg/Include/*BootScript*.h > -F: MdeModulePkg/Include/*LockBox*.h > -F: MdeModulePkg/Include/*S3*.h > -F: MdeModulePkg/Library/*S3*/ > -R: Hao A Wu [hwu25] > -R: Eric Dong [ydong10] > - > MdeModulePkg: BDS modules > F: MdeModulePkg/*BootManager*/ > F: MdeModulePkg/Include/Library/UefiBootManagerLib.h > @@ -326,7 +302,6 @@ F: MdeModulePkg/Library/DxeSecurityManagementLib/ > F: MdeModulePkg/Universal/PCD/ > F: MdeModulePkg/Universal/PlatformDriOverrideDxe/ > F: MdeModulePkg/Universal/SecurityStubDxe/SecurityStub.c > -R: Dandan Bi [dandanbi] > R: Liming Gao [lgao4] Down to one reviewer. > > MdeModulePkg: Device and Peripheral modules > @@ -346,12 +321,10 @@ F: MdeModulePkg/Include/Ppi/StorageSecurityCommand.h > F: MdeModulePkg/Include/Protocol/Ps2Policy.h > F: MdeModulePkg/Library/NonDiscoverableDeviceRegistrationLib/ > F: MdeModulePkg/Universal/PcatSingleSegmentPciCfg2Pei/ > -R: Hao A Wu [hwu25] > R: Ray Ni [niruiyu] Device and bus related code is down to one reviewer. > > MdeModulePkg: Disk modules > F: MdeModulePkg/Universal/Disk/ > -R: Hao A Wu [hwu25] > R: Ray Ni [nirui
[edk2-devel] [Patch 1/1] Maintainers.txt: Update based on active community members
Over the past few months, all the of the Maintainers and Reviewers listed in Maintainers.txt have been contacted to make sure Maintainers.txt accurately represents the TianoCore community members that are actively participating in their roles. Based on specific feedback, bounced emails, and no responses, updates have been made. * RISCV64: Daniel Schaefer replaced with Andrei Warkentin * ArmVirtPkg Xen has no remaining reviewers and review responsibility defaults to ArmVirtPkg Maintainers/Reviewers. * ACPI modules related to S3 has no remaining reviewers and review responsibility defaults to MdeModulePkg Maintainers/ Reviewers. * OVMF CSM modules has no remaining reviewers and review responsibility defaults to OvmfPkg Maintainers/Reviewers. * Bounce: Chan Laura * Many smaller updates removing individuals that are no longer involved or have replacement coverage. Cc: Andrew Fish Cc: Leif Lindholm Cc: Andrei Warkentin Cc: Catharine West Cc: Dandan Bi Cc: Daniel Schaefer Cc: David Woodhouse Cc: Debkumar De Cc: Eric Dong Cc: Guomin Jiang Cc: Hao A Wu Cc: James Bottomley Cc: Jian J Wang Cc: Jordan Justen Cc: Julien Grall Cc: Peter Grehan Cc: Qi Zhang Cc: Ray Han Lim Ng Cc: Stefan Berger Cc: Wenxing Hou Cc: Xiaoyu Lu Signed-off-by: Michael D Kinney --- Maintainers.txt | 53 ++--- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 51 deletions(-) diff --git a/Maintainers.txt b/Maintainers.txt index 3f40cdeb5554..2b03ccbe54aa 100644 --- a/Maintainers.txt +++ b/Maintainers.txt @@ -93,7 +93,7 @@ M: Sami Mujawar [samimujawar] RISCV64 F: */RiscV64/ M: Sunil V L [vlsunil] -R: Daniel Schaefer [JohnAZoidberg] +R: Andrei Warkentin [andreiw] LOONGARCH64 F: */LoongArch64/ @@ -157,16 +157,6 @@ R: Leif Lindholm [leiflindholm] R: Sami Mujawar [samimujawar] R: Gerd Hoffmann [kraxel] -ArmVirtPkg: modules used on Xen -F: ArmVirtPkg/ArmVirtXen.* -F: ArmVirtPkg/Library/XenArmGenericTimerVirtCounterLib/ -F: ArmVirtPkg/Library/XenVirtMemInfoLib/ -F: ArmVirtPkg/PrePi/ -F: ArmVirtPkg/XenAcpiPlatformDxe/ -F: ArmVirtPkg/XenPlatformHasAcpiDtDxe/ -F: ArmVirtPkg/XenioFdtDxe/ -R: Julien Grall [jgrall] - BaseTools F: BaseTools/ W: https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/BaseTools @@ -187,8 +177,7 @@ F: CryptoPkg/ W: https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/CryptoPkg M: Jiewen Yao [jyao1] M: Yi Li [liyi77] -R: Xiaoyu Lu [xiaoyuxlu] -R: Guomin Jiang [guominjia] +R: Wenxing Hou [Wenxing-hou] DynamicTablesPkg F: DynamicTablesPkg/ @@ -202,7 +191,6 @@ W: https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/EmbeddedPkg M: Leif Lindholm [leiflindholm] M: Ard Biesheuvel [ardbiesheuvel] M: Abner Chang [changab] -R: Daniel Schaefer [JohnAZoidberg] EmulatorPkg F: EmulatorPkg/ @@ -228,7 +216,6 @@ F: FmpDevicePkg/ W: https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/FmpDevicePkg M: Liming Gao [lgao4] M: Michael D Kinney [mdkinney] -R: Guomin Jiang [guominjia] R: Wei6 Xu [xuweiintel] IntelFsp2Pkg @@ -237,7 +224,6 @@ W: https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/IntelFsp2Pkg M: Chasel Chiu [ChaselChiu] M: Nate DeSimone [nate-desimone] M: Duggapu Chinni B [cbduggap] -M: Ray Han Lim Ng [rayhanlimng] R: Star Zeng [lzeng14] R: Ted Kuo [tedkuo1] R: Ashraf Ali S [AshrafAliS] @@ -258,7 +244,6 @@ R: Susovan Mohapatra [susovanmohapatra] MdeModulePkg F: MdeModulePkg/ W: https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/MdeModulePkg -M: Jian J Wang [jwang36] M: Liming Gao [lgao4] MdeModulePkg: ACPI modules @@ -268,15 +253,6 @@ R: Zhiguang Liu [LiuZhiguang001] R: Dandan Bi [dandanbi] R: Liming Gao [lgao4] -MdeModulePkg: ACPI modules related to S3 -F: MdeModulePkg/*LockBox*/ -F: MdeModulePkg/Include/*BootScript*.h -F: MdeModulePkg/Include/*LockBox*.h -F: MdeModulePkg/Include/*S3*.h -F: MdeModulePkg/Library/*S3*/ -R: Hao A Wu [hwu25] -R: Eric Dong [ydong10] - MdeModulePkg: BDS modules F: MdeModulePkg/*BootManager*/ F: MdeModulePkg/Include/Library/UefiBootManagerLib.h @@ -326,7 +302,6 @@ F: MdeModulePkg/Library/DxeSecurityManagementLib/ F: MdeModulePkg/Universal/PCD/ F: MdeModulePkg/Universal/PlatformDriOverrideDxe/ F: MdeModulePkg/Universal/SecurityStubDxe/SecurityStub.c -R: Dandan Bi [dandanbi] R: Liming Gao [lgao4] MdeModulePkg: Device and Peripheral modules @@ -346,12 +321,10 @@ F: MdeModulePkg/Include/Ppi/StorageSecurityCommand.h F: MdeModulePkg/Include/Protocol/Ps2Policy.h F: MdeModulePkg/Library/NonDiscoverableDeviceRegistrationLib/ F: MdeModulePkg/Universal/PcatSingleSegmentPciCfg2Pei/ -R: Hao A Wu [hwu25] R: Ray Ni [niruiyu] MdeModulePkg: Disk modules F: MdeModulePkg/Universal/Disk/ -R: Hao A Wu [hwu25] R: Ray Ni [niruiyu] R: Zhichao Gao [ZhichaoGao] @@ -366,7 +339,6 @@ F: MdeModulePkg/Library/DisplayUpdateProgressLib*/ F: MdeModulePkg/Library/FmpAuthenticationLibNull/ F: MdeModulePkg/Universal/Esrt*/ R: Liming Gao [lgao4] -R: Guomin J
