The content at administration.html discussed hats, not maintainers.
While certain people do tend to own various areas, this is covered by
MAINTAINERS, Herald, etc. Just remove the reference to administration
since its off-topic in this context.
Details
Diff Detail
- Lint
No Lint Coverage - Unit
No Test Coverage - Build Status
Buildable 17776 Build 17558: arc lint + arc unit
Event Timeline
I think this page might have referred to some of these folks in the past, but those individuals have been purged by now (at least the ones mentioned explicitly in the text). Do we have any other references to things like re@ owning release branches (and other branches during freezes?) or secteam@ owning certain parts of the tree?
en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/committers-guide/article.xml | ||
---|---|---|
3319 | src doesn't do this very often if ever. src uses MAINTAINERS which doesn't seem to be mentioned here. |
We do. See also:
<para>Changes to the security branches (for example, <para>Changes to the security branches (for example, <literal>releng/9.3</literal>) must be approved by a member of the &a.security-officer;, or in some cases, by a
en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/committers-guide/article.xml | ||
---|---|---|
3319 | Its mentioned in other places. See
|
en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/committers-guide/article.xml | ||
---|---|---|
3319 | I just find it confusing that we mention the practice we don't use and don't mention the one we do use. I don't think that is part of this commit btw, but something worth clarifying. (also I can't tell what line that is from your quote, if we want to only describe "how to find a maintainer" in one place, then that is fine, but we should use links to reference that from the other places) |
en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/committers-guide/article.xml | ||
---|---|---|
3319 | I agree with you. The guide could use some more work. The patches I sent y'all recently were ones that changed policy or introduced new guidance, and thus required core@ approvals. When my development machine is back to functional, I'll make some more passes over the commit guide for these kinds of issues. |
ref rD52061 - forgot to mention the differential when transferring between git and svn