From: Linus Arver <linusa@google.com>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
Linus Arver via GitGitGadget <gitgitgadget@gmail.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] RFC: add MAINTAINERS file
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2024 21:32:55 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <owly7cho1eh4.fsf@fine.c.googlers.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqqsf0gvjrg.fsf@gitster.g>
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:
> "Linus Arver via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> From: Linus Arver <linusa@google.com>
>>
>> This patch is designed to spur discussion about adding an official
>> MAINTAINERS file to our project. The hope is that it could be used as a
>> reference in (at least) the following scenarios:
>>
>> (1) [CC list] patch authors want to know who to CC on their
>> submissions, without resorting to git-blame-level of precision;
>>
>> (2) [escalation path] patch authors have been waiting 1+ weeks for
>> review comments, but are not sure who to escalate to (other than
>> Junio);
>>
>> (3) [status tracking] record former maintainers/reviewers who are now
>> inactive.
>>
>> In addition having a MAINTAINERS file could give a more official sense
>> of ownership in the codebase.
>
> OK. They are understandable goals.
>
> As to the format of the actual file, I do not have much opinion.
> What works for the kernel may or may not work for us, as the project
> size is very different, but I am fairly confident that we can agree
> on something usable.
Agreed.
> I am more worried about how the file is used and maintained. Some
> things to think about while in the "spurred discussion" I can think
> of are:
>
> - Is the project big enough to require this (especially for the
> purpose of (1)), or would
>
> $ git shortlog -n --no-merges --since=24.months -- path-to-file
>
> be sufficient and more importantly the value that it will keep
> current automatically outweigh the benefit of having this file
> that can go stale?
>
> To answer this question, we'd need to know
> the turnover rates of past project contributors, of course. If
> it is too high, having such a list may help for (1) and (3)
> above.
In addition to checking git-shortlog on the Git repo, perhaps it's also
worth running a similar query against the public-inbox repo of this
list? We could perhaps use a script to generate this list automatically
every Git release (or some other cadence that we undergo regularly)?
> - How binding is it for a contributor to be on this list as an area
> expert? Will there be concrete "expected response time"? It can
> be different for each area expert, of course. I'd expect better
> from those who work on Git as a major part of their job and
> contributes some part of their work product back to the upstream,
> than from folks who do Git as a hobby. Is each contributer
> expected to volunteer to be on this list, with self declared
> service level target?
Ideally there should be some teeth to the document/agreement (esp for
service level targets), but I think practically the best we can do is
positive reinforcement. So maybe a prominent "The Git Code Review Team"
web page (somewhere on git-scm.com?) with profile photos and short
biographies should be enough to motivate people to stay engaged and keep
their spot.
I realize that such an idea is beyond the scope of a simple MAINTAINERS
(or similar) file that's checked into the Git code repo, but I think
it's worth stating as a thought experiment. The overall point I want to
make is that we need to be extra-thankful to those who sign up to say
"yes, I can review patches in areas X, Y, Z" and recognize (in a very
official way) their generosity in contributing back to this project.
> - With many good reviewer candidates being employed in companies
> and doing Git as part of their job, how would we handle folks
> getting transferred out of the Git ecosystem? Unlike in a
> corporate environment, nominating successors who have no track
> record in the community by the current area expert would not work
> at all. The successors themselves have to earn respect by
> demonstrating their own competence, which would take time.
Unfortunately I don't think there's a good answer here. I agree that
only those who have demonstrated a good track record should become a
"successor".
OTOH, if we are fortunate enough to have multiple people sign up for a
particular area, then maybe that can be a sub-team and finding a
successor won't be such a big deal. It would only be a problem for those
areas where there is only 1 person who signed up for it.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-03-27 4:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-03-23 3:27 [PATCH] RFC: add MAINTAINERS file Linus Arver via GitGitGadget
2024-03-23 19:19 ` Junio C Hamano
2024-03-25 2:51 ` Junio C Hamano
2024-03-27 5:33 ` Linus Arver
2024-03-27 7:17 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2024-03-30 18:03 ` Linus Arver
2024-03-30 21:44 ` Junio C Hamano
2024-04-01 21:33 ` Taylor Blau
2024-04-01 22:13 ` Junio C Hamano
2024-04-02 0:22 ` Linus Arver
2024-04-02 5:39 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2024-04-02 5:46 ` Eric Sunshine
2024-04-02 5:59 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2024-03-26 22:24 ` Linus Arver
2024-03-26 23:39 ` Taylor Blau
2024-03-27 0:05 ` Junio C Hamano
2024-03-27 4:32 ` Linus Arver [this message]
2024-03-27 13:29 ` Junio C Hamano
2024-03-30 17:59 ` Linus Arver
2024-04-02 6:22 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2024-04-04 0:47 ` Linus Arver
2024-04-02 7:00 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2024-04-02 17:00 ` Junio C Hamano
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=owly7cho1eh4.fsf@fine.c.googlers.com \
--to=linusa@google.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitgitgadget@gmail.com \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).