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
