On 09/10/2010 12:45 PM, Blue Swirl wrote:
On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 9:18 PM, Anthony Liguori<aligu...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
I make no claims that this is accurate or exhaustive but I think it's a
reasonable place to start.
As the file mentions, the purpose of this file is to give contributors
information about who they can go to with questions about a particular piece of
code or who they can ask for review.
If you sign up for a piece of code and indicate that it's Maintained or
Supported, please be prepared to be responsive to questions about that
subsystem.
Signed-off-by: Anthony Liguori<aligu...@us.ibm.com>
diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
index 79dfc7f..3894cd8 100644
--- a/MAINTAINERS
+++ b/MAINTAINERS
@@ -9,89 +9,388 @@ to be CC'd when submitting a patch to obtain appropriate
review.
In general, if you have a question about inclusion of a patch, you should
consult qemu-devel and not any specific individual privately.
-Project leaders:
-----------------
+Please see the MAINTAINERS file in the Linux kernel for information about how
+to update this file.
-Paul Brook
-Anthony Liguori
+General Project Administration
+------------------------------
+M: Anthony Liguori<aligu...@us.ibm.com>
+M: Paul Brook<p...@codesourcery.com>
Guest CPU cores (TCG):
Perhaps the CPU names should be in alphabetical order.
Yeah, I was thinking that alphabetical order across the board would make
sense.
For
completeness, KVM CPUs should have X: target-xxx/kvm.c, though
currently TCG and KVM maintainers match.
You mean F: right?
I already have that in my copy.
+SPARC Machines
+--------------
+Sun4u
There is also Sun4v here, though its status could be Odd Fixes. These
are actually machine classes, but currently only few machines are
implemented.
What should the entry look like?
+M: Blue Swirl<blauwir...@gmail.com>
+S: Maintained
Maybe also the technical status should be indicated, something like
Unusable, Boots BIOS, Boots a kernel, Stable?
I'd avoid that here. If something is unusable for long, I think that
automatically makes it Orphan'd, no?
+F: hw/sun4u.c
+
+Sun4m
There's also Sun4c and Sun4d machine classes. There are 9 different
Sun4m machines, but do we want to list them? The same thing actually
applies to isapc machine.
The granularity is what makes sense as someone who's hacking on the
code. So whether you think folks would need to see the difference
really is up to you since you're the primary person in this space.
For PC, I don't think there's really a need to call out each machine
individually.
How about also listing the ROMs under pc-bios? I'd claim openbios-*,
except if Alex wants openbios-ppc, that's fine too.
Yes, that's a good idea.
Regards,
Anthony Liguori