glibc subtree maintainers list - any updates?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
7 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

glibc subtree maintainers list - any updates?

Dwayne Grant McConnell-2

According to

http://www.gnu.org/software/libc/ports

the people responsible for various subtrees are as follows. Please let me
know if the names and/or email addresses of the responsible parties have
changed. I'll be contacting some of you regarding bug triage questions.

Thanks,
Dwayne

hurd/
mach/
sysdeps/mach/
    Roland McGrath <[hidden email]> and Mark Kettenis <[hidden email]>
sysdeps/alpha/
    Richard Henderson <[hidden email]>
sysdeps/arm/
    Philipp Blundell <[hidden email]>
sysdeps/ia64/
    Jes Sorensen <[hidden email]>
sysdeps/i386/
    Ulrich Drepper <[hidden email]>
sysdeps/m68k/
    Andreas Schwab <[hidden email]>
sysdeps/mips/
    Andreas Jaeger <[hidden email]>
sysdeps/s390/
    Martin Schwidefsky <[hidden email]>
sysdeps/sh/
    Kazumoto Kojima/Yutaka Niibe
sysdeps/x86_64/
    Andreas Jaeger <[hidden email]>
sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/arm/
    Philipp Blundell <[hidden email]>
sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/alpha/
    Richard Henderson <[hidden email]>
sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/ia64/
    Jes Sorensen <[hidden email]>
sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/i386/
    Ulrich Drepper <[hidden email]>
sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/m68k/
    Andreas Schwab <[hidden email]>
sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/mips/
    Andreas Jaeger <[hidden email]>
sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/ppc/
    Steven Munroe <[hidden email]>
sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/sh/
    Kazumoto Kojima/Yutaka Niibe <[hidden email]>
sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/sparc/
    Jakub Jelinek <[hidden email]>
sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/s390/
    Martin Schwidefsky <[hidden email]>
sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64/
    Andreas Jaeger <[hidden email]>

--
Dwayne Grant McConnell <[hidden email]>
Lotus Notes Mail: Dwayne McConnell [Mail]/Austin/IBM@IBMUS
Lotus Notes Calendar: Dwayne McConnell [Calendar]/Austin/IBM@IBMUS
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: glibc subtree maintainers list - any updates?

Steven Munroe
[hidden email] wrote on 02/28/2006 03:15:57 PM:

>>
>>
>> According to
>>
>> http://www.gnu.org/software/libc/ports
>>
>> the people responsible for various subtrees are as follows. Please let me
>  
>> know if the names and/or email addresses of the responsible parties have
>> changed. I'll be contacting some of you regarding bug triage questions.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Dwayne
>>
>> sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/ppc/
>>     Steven Munroe <[hidden email]>
>  

This is out of date, should be:

sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/powerpc/
    Steven Munroe <[hidden email]>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: glibc subtree maintainers list - any updates?

Daniel Jacobowitz-2
In reply to this post by Dwayne Grant McConnell-2
On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 03:15:57PM -0600, Dwayne Grant McConnell wrote:
> sysdeps/arm/
>     Philipp Blundell <[hidden email]>

> sysdeps/mips/
>     Andreas Jaeger <[hidden email]>

> sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/arm/
>     Philipp Blundell <[hidden email]>

> sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/mips/
>     Andreas Jaeger <[hidden email]>

I have the feeling I should be listed for these now.  But why are you
contacting anyone off list about bug triage?  I'd think that either
through Bugzilla or through the libc-alpha/libc-ports lists as
appropriate would be a better choice.

This applies to just about everything: discussions that can happen in
public are more useful in public where they can be archived.

--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: glibc subtree maintainers list - any updates?

Andreas Jaeger
In reply to this post by Dwayne Grant McConnell-2
Dwayne Grant McConnell <[hidden email]> writes:

> sysdeps/mips/
>     Andreas Jaeger <[hidden email]>
> sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/mips/
>     Andreas Jaeger <[hidden email]>


This is now in the ports directory.  I suggest to list Daniel Jacobitz
on first position for mips,

Andreas
--
 Andreas Jaeger, [hidden email], http://www.suse.de/~aj/
  SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 N├╝rnberg, Germany
   GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F  FED1 389A 563C C272 A126

attachment0 (194 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: glibc subtree maintainers list - any updates?

Roland McGrath
In reply to this post by Dwayne Grant McConnell-2
It would be great if you could rewrite that web page. :-)
(You should already have access via savannah cvs.)

It is somewhat out of date, and I'm not sure how useful its organization
is.  It's nice to have that information around and current.  
But, like Daniel, I wonder what you are actually using it for.

Are you looking for specific people to CC on bugzilla reports that are
machine-specific?  When an issue is clearly particular to an architecture,
it may be useful to poke a particular person to weigh in on it.  But, all
appropriate such people are expected to be on libc-alpha and/or libc-ports
already.  So it may be simplest just to post a request on the mailing list
(libc-ports if the architecture is in ports, libc-alpha if in core)
pointing to the bugzilla.  That also gets the attention of anyone else who
happens to know enough about that architecture to help with that issue.

As to updating that page, firstly it should say something about 2.3 vs 2.4
in the Supported Systems part.  For the maintainers info, it's only useful
to talk about the trunk state of things.

In Subtree Maintainers, some email addresses are old; you can find each
person's name in a recent ChangeLog entry to see what address they
currently prefer for glibc purposes; for people who have gnu.org aliases,
that is usually the best thing to use (it's right for me, though I use
different addresses in log entries).  Also "ppc" is really "powerpc".

The statement "All architecture-specific or system-specific directories
not listed here are currently not actively maintained." is not quite
true.  For one thing, it doesn't list sysdeps/unix and so forth, and
sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux that are "system-specific" but in fact part of
the "generic" core for maintenance purposes.  It should separately
indicate the list in the core tree and the list in the ports repository.
As of now, we like to think that all of the architectures in the core
tree are being quite actively maintained.  (Ones that aren't, we've
moved to ports.)  A few ports architectures are pretty actively
maintained, but just because there is a person on the list who might
even answer, doesn't mean that it's actively maintained (it might just
mean there is someone to talk to if you want to work on fixing it).
Conversely just because it's actively maintained doesn't mean it's
actually quite working; Carlos might like to have a pointer to his
status on hppa work.

It would be more useful to group the related directories together, and
perhaps include a config triplet in the heading.  Then there are just a
few blocks, and those are:

* core
** alpha: Richard Henderson <[hidden email]>
** i386: Ulrich Drepper <[hidden email]>
** x86_64: ??? Andreas Jaeger ??? Ulrich Drepper ???
** ia64: ??? Jakub Jelinek ??? H.J. Lu ???
** powerpc: Steven Munroe <[hidden email]>
** s390: Martin Schwidefsky <[hidden email]>
** sparc: Jakub Jelinek <[hidden email]>
** sh: Kaz Kojima <[hidden email]>
** hurd: Roland McGrath <[hidden email]>

* ports
** m68k: Andreas Schwab <[hidden email]>
** mips: Daniel Jacobowitz <[hidden email]>
** arm: Phil Blundell <[hidden email]>, Daniel Jacobowitz <[hidden email]>
** am33: Alexandre Oliva <[hidden email]>
** hppa: Carlos O'Donell <[hidden email]>
** powerpc/nofpu: Steven Munroe <[hidden email]>

Those are the people nominally responsible and who should sign off on
ABI choices specific to that machine and so forth, who "represent the
users" of the architecture, though certainly not necessarily the people
who work most on that architecture's code.  (For most of the core linux
architectures, Jakub does more fixing, testing, and proactive watching
out for architecture issues, than everyone else.)


Thanks,
Roland
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: glibc subtree maintainers list - any updates?

Dwayne Grant McConnell-2
In reply to this post by Daniel Jacobowitz-2
On Tue, 28 Feb 2006, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 03:15:57PM -0600, Dwayne Grant McConnell wrote:
> > sysdeps/arm/
> >     Philipp Blundell <[hidden email]>
>
> > sysdeps/mips/
> >     Andreas Jaeger <[hidden email]>
>
> > sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/arm/
> >     Philipp Blundell <[hidden email]>
>
> > sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/mips/
> >     Andreas Jaeger <[hidden email]>
>
> I have the feeling I should be listed for these now.  But why are you
> contacting anyone off list about bug triage?  I'd think that either
> through Bugzilla or through the libc-alpha/libc-ports lists as
> appropriate would be a better choice.
>
> This applies to just about everything: discussions that can happen in
> public are more useful in public where they can be archived.

Thanks for the update and the advice. I'll do as you suggest.

--
Dwayne Grant McConnell <[hidden email]>
Lotus Notes Mail: Dwayne McConnell [Mail]/Austin/IBM@IBMUS
Lotus Notes Calendar: Dwayne McConnell [Calendar]/Austin/IBM@IBMUS
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: glibc subtree maintainers list - any updates?

Dwayne Grant McConnell-2
In reply to this post by Roland McGrath
On Wed, 1 Mar 2006, Roland McGrath wrote:

> It would be great if you could rewrite that web page. :-)
> (You should already have access via savannah cvs.)

Will do.

> It is somewhat out of date, and I'm not sure how useful its organization
> is.  It's nice to have that information around and current.  
> But, like Daniel, I wonder what you are actually using it for.

I'm going through the bugs now grouping them by topic including by
architecture and I was going to CC the relevant person in my notes. But
I'm happy to just send to libc-alpha/libc-ports too. I also assumed the
web page was out of date and figured this was as good a time as any to
update it. I'll use you notes below as a starting point.

> Are you looking for specific people to CC on bugzilla reports that are
> machine-specific?  When an issue is clearly particular to an architecture,
> it may be useful to poke a particular person to weigh in on it.  But, all
> appropriate such people are expected to be on libc-alpha and/or libc-ports
> already.  So it may be simplest just to post a request on the mailing list
> (libc-ports if the architecture is in ports, libc-alpha if in core)
> pointing to the bugzilla.  That also gets the attention of anyone else who
> happens to know enough about that architecture to help with that issue.
>
> As to updating that page, firstly it should say something about 2.3 vs 2.4
> in the Supported Systems part.  For the maintainers info, it's only useful
> to talk about the trunk state of things.
>
> In Subtree Maintainers, some email addresses are old; you can find each
> person's name in a recent ChangeLog entry to see what address they
> currently prefer for glibc purposes; for people who have gnu.org aliases,
> that is usually the best thing to use (it's right for me, though I use
> different addresses in log entries).  Also "ppc" is really "powerpc".
>
> The statement "All architecture-specific or system-specific directories
> not listed here are currently not actively maintained." is not quite
> true.  For one thing, it doesn't list sysdeps/unix and so forth, and
> sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux that are "system-specific" but in fact part of
> the "generic" core for maintenance purposes.  It should separately
> indicate the list in the core tree and the list in the ports repository.
> As of now, we like to think that all of the architectures in the core
> tree are being quite actively maintained.  (Ones that aren't, we've
> moved to ports.)  A few ports architectures are pretty actively
> maintained, but just because there is a person on the list who might
> even answer, doesn't mean that it's actively maintained (it might just
> mean there is someone to talk to if you want to work on fixing it).
> Conversely just because it's actively maintained doesn't mean it's
> actually quite working; Carlos might like to have a pointer to his
> status on hppa work.
>
> It would be more useful to group the related directories together, and
> perhaps include a config triplet in the heading.  Then there are just a
> few blocks, and those are:
>
> * core
> ** alpha: Richard Henderson <[hidden email]>
> ** i386: Ulrich Drepper <[hidden email]>
> ** x86_64: ??? Andreas Jaeger ??? Ulrich Drepper ???
> ** ia64: ??? Jakub Jelinek ??? H.J. Lu ???
> ** powerpc: Steven Munroe <[hidden email]>
> ** s390: Martin Schwidefsky <[hidden email]>
> ** sparc: Jakub Jelinek <[hidden email]>
> ** sh: Kaz Kojima <[hidden email]>
> ** hurd: Roland McGrath <[hidden email]>
>
> * ports
> ** m68k: Andreas Schwab <[hidden email]>
> ** mips: Daniel Jacobowitz <[hidden email]>
> ** arm: Phil Blundell <[hidden email]>, Daniel Jacobowitz <[hidden email]>
> ** am33: Alexandre Oliva <[hidden email]>
> ** hppa: Carlos O'Donell <[hidden email]>
> ** powerpc/nofpu: Steven Munroe <[hidden email]>
>
> Those are the people nominally responsible and who should sign off on
> ABI choices specific to that machine and so forth, who "represent the
> users" of the architecture, though certainly not necessarily the people
> who work most on that architecture's code.  (For most of the core linux
> architectures, Jakub does more fixing, testing, and proactive watching
> out for architecture issues, than everyone else.)

--
Dwayne Grant McConnell <[hidden email]>
Lotus Notes Mail: Dwayne McConnell [Mail]/Austin/IBM@IBMUS
Lotus Notes Calendar: Dwayne McConnell [Calendar]/Austin/IBM@IBMUS