Am 12.02.2016 um 10:17 schrieb Marcel Apfelbaum: > On 02/11/2016 09:41 PM, Eduardo Habkost wrote: >> On Fri, Feb 05, 2016 at 09:51:07AM +0200, Marcel Apfelbaum wrote: >>> On 02/05/2016 09:49 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote: >>>> "Michael S. Tsirkin" <m...@redhat.com> writes: >>>> >>>>> On Thu, Feb 04, 2016 at 12:55:22PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 04/02/2016 12:41, Andreas Färber wrote: >>>>>>> You're talking about machine, right? Some time ago I had proposed >>>>>>> Marcel >>>>>>> who initially worked on it, but I'm fine with anyone taking it. >>>>>> >>>>>> Yes. >>>>>> >>>>>>> For some (but not all) core qdev parts related to the (stalled) QOM >>>>>>> migration I've been taking care of via qom-next. Last time this >>>>>>> came up >>>>>>> you didn't want anyone to be M: for qdev, so maybe we can use R: >>>>>>> so that >>>>>>> at least people automatically get CC'ed and we avoid this recurring >>>>>>> discussion? >>>>>> >>>>>> I might have changed my mind on that. You definitely should be M: >>>>>> for qdev. >>>>>> >>>>>> Paolo >>>>> >>>>> If Andreas wants to, that's also fine. Several maintainers are >>>>> better than one. >>>> >>>> *If* the maintainers are all willing and able to work together. >>>> >>> >>> No problem here from my point of view :) >> >> No problem to me, too. :) >> >> I am going to be away from work for 15 days starting on Tuesday >> Feb 16th. So if Marcel wants to start queueing patches already, >> please be my guest. I will be able to help on that after I'm >> back. >> > > Hi, > > If there are only a few patches on the mailing list, they can wait. > If the number will grow I'll send a pull request. > > So the MAINTAINER file should look like this, right? > > Regarding qdev, Andreas, I also think you are the most qualified > to take it, will you? > > diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS > index 2d6ee17..a86491a 100644 > --- a/MAINTAINERS > +++ b/MAINTAINERS > @@ -1200,6 +1200,13 @@ F: docs/*qmp-* > F: scripts/qmp/ > T: git git://repo.or.cz/qemu/armbru.git qapi-next > > +Machine > +M: Eduardo Habkost <ehabk...@redhat.com> > +M: Marcel Apfelbaum <mar...@redhat.com> > +S: Supported > +F: hw/core/machine.c > +F: include/hw/boards.h > +
Fine with me, ack. For qdev.c itself I prefer not to create a misleading "QDev" section but rather just proposed a first step to split up qdev.c not just into common vs. system-only code but also in better maintainable subareas. That's targeted at having a section like "Core device API" covering a to-be-created device.c with myself plus some backup as maintainer, then Igor/mst/whomever for "Device hotplug interface" or the like. qdev-system.c we could consider to split up so that the block/net/char specific parts can be assigned clear maintainers - haven't investigated that part yet. In the meantime we could simply create multiple sections covering different aspects of qdev* files. Cheers, Andreas -- SUSE Linux GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton; HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)