On 6 November 2018 at 18:52, Thomas Huth <th...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 2018-11-06 19:49, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
>> On 6/11/18 19:17, Thomas Huth wrote:
>>> There is no active maintainer, but since Peter is picking up
>>> patches via qemu-...@nongnu.org, I think we could at least use
>>> "Odd Fixes" as status here.
>>
>> This looks more as "Orphan" to me...
>
> I'll leave it up to Peter for the final decision...

I think we're not very consistent[*] in our usage of the various
statuses in the MAINTAINERS file. I guess "Odd Fixes" makes
sense in that, well, if you send a patch to this
code and cc me I'll review it and put it in the tree. (This
is true of any of the arm boards we have.)

[*] We have one thing tagged Orphan, which is bsd-user/,
and some things tagged Odd Fixes with no listed maintainer,
and some things tagged Odd Fixes which are in practice more
like Orphan (for instance sh4), and we list "fpu/" as
Odd Fixes despite having given it a pretty thorough
overhaul very recently, and so on...

If you wanted a mechanizable rule, you could try something
like "every file which is in status Odd Fixes or better
must list with M: at least one named individual who has
submitted a pull request in the last nine months" :-)

thanks
-- PMM

Reply via email to