On Mon, Aug 3, 2026 at 2:02 PM Stefan Hajnoczi <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Sun, Aug 02, 2026 at 04:13:35PM +0200, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: > > On 31/7/26 23:17, Denis V. Lunev wrote: > > > On 7/31/26 22:18, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jul 31, 2026 at 9:45 AM Denis V. Lunev <[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > On 7/30/26 16:55, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 30, 2026 at 4:14 AM Denis V. Lunev <[email protected]> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Denis V. Lunev <[email protected]> > > > > > > > CC: Stefan Hajnoczi <[email protected]> > > > > > > > CC: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <[email protected]> > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > MAINTAINERS | 1 + > > > > > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS > > > > > > > index 902db77218..4628793dde 100644 > > > > > > > --- a/MAINTAINERS > > > > > > > +++ b/MAINTAINERS > > > > > > > @@ -2160,6 +2160,7 @@ F: docs/specs/edu.rst > > > > > > > > > > > > > > IDE > > > > > > > M: John Snow <[email protected]> > > > > > > > +M: Denis V. Lunev <[email protected]> > > > > > > Waiting for acknowledgement from John. > > > > Note, Denis is not removing / replacing John, but simply > > stepping up to co-maintain an area unattented since quite > > some time. I doubt John will oppose to that precious and > > scarce help. > > I don't think so either, but he should be involved in the process of > adding a co-maintainer. There is no rush, let's give him a few more > days rather than making the decision for him.
My apologies, I was entertaining house guests and was not reading my email. I had intended to drop down to just "Odd Fixes" and could swear I sent a patch to do so some time ago, but apparently this never took. Obviously, I have not paid a single drop of attention to IDE/FDC for quite some time and am elated to hand it over to someone with an active interest in fixing it up. The reason I haven't been paying attention to IDE/FDC in general is due to the work required to verify and rewrite (often) low-effort CVE fixes. CVE hotfix patches for IDE in my experience usually just added an early return to the callback event loop to avoid a NULL dereference. These patches often didn't validate or test the register values or event loop state, and finding the "correct" error return strategy was often quite a lot of work that involved testing on quite a lot of operating systems to ensure we didn't break legacy systems, and this amount of work was in conflict with my other responsibilities, so it often got pushed by the wayside. None of that excuses my silence and unexcused absence, and for that, I am sorry. Please, please do go ahead and take over. Apologies, --js
