From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3F2C129BD82; Mon, 25 Aug 2025 08:20:52 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1756110054; cv=none; b=lJ7k/x3dXT/t9uYQltyIvHggiQIbbGNv2uZd2dC74ic49BGmwz3GH34knq6SiESfQIRHr1ASSLbpKlfz0lX9ZY6l52aLTGPkk44uJAoVdYrXTXva2taB1b084Uu0F6Sa+dIRvc4fpapWY2OTsYXs7zF36eTzERacsm/KOY+6gtk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1756110054; c=relaxed/simple; bh=yJJQ2u/iKmxy+e3RF/GJg2tOmR67e64wxy33L/BxuSE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=oQfjHUhJoYlofj8llgkh0zso63G3Cxb962/m0PWyMrd9bQtBGI9dL0E4Ct/cUfmNsom2xV7JU0r/oISujcSX6tJlrQrQ3CeaH92wrWfYRV7V/PtCGlBFRLEDt+iHeVaJHVs1K6XwzVW9uAbLPKkJpNBCgkX3DRIUy74KW9J4BWo= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=K8sfNm6P; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="K8sfNm6P" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8F3B7C4CEED; Mon, 25 Aug 2025 08:20:51 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1756110052; bh=yJJQ2u/iKmxy+e3RF/GJg2tOmR67e64wxy33L/BxuSE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=K8sfNm6PJklGFXEsL0q9K4u/Xycxfzj8GTQKiInKWdvG9CEOrwKFbIO2odJfArrg1 h9RY+mPeLo52u8gfcpLN6fWE1478tfZzkeUBQUMg6ijQm/eRo/pobKvk72SC5uFDyd YoUTuJfkzkT1uxJbH2njDhnw0oMjXxWupy7TPRjoZ67W6xzfNKu7v4U+0/vKv30kN8 q5Ujo5hxqkYOvoPB5aAay0Lk6pE+j3dtzjCEjg8nrxIQAUnz89rx/YoRXTxi4hHEhw zVrh79DMsWMk7+DKRQY6LrzsqZn6Rwl0U5+URupGx5SBl0y+NAtNKqyqQersxQtD10 6jTb82sK2Irzg== Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2025 10:20:48 +0200 From: Mauro Carvalho Chehab To: James Bottomley Cc: Theodore Tso , Greg KH , ksummit@lists.linux.dev, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [MAINTAINER SUMMIT] Adding more formality around feature inclusion and ejection Message-ID: <20250825102048.754ee0a2@foz.lan> In-Reply-To: <62aea685546cee80b18cfd7e1ea50b1a590d5edd.camel@HansenPartnership.com> References: <20250821203407.GA1284215@mit.edu> <940ac5ad8a6b1daa239d748e8f77479a140b050d.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <2025082202-lankiness-talisman-3803@gregkh> <20250822122424.GA34412@macsyma.lan> <62aea685546cee80b18cfd7e1ea50b1a590d5edd.camel@HansenPartnership.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.3.1 (GTK 3.24.49; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: ksummit@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Em Fri, 22 Aug 2025 16:31:49 +0100 James Bottomley escreveu: > Well I did ask for two concrete things, but I can certainly repeat: > > On Fri, 2025-08-22 at 09:09 +0100, James Bottomley wrote: > > I think I'd be happy if we sort out two things > > > > 1. That the decision be taken by more than one person rather than > > abdicating to last man standing > > 2. The outcome be documented clearly. There are some aspects here: - Who will communicate the decision? The way I see, the best would be if this would be done by the subsystem maintainers who accepted/acked the feature addition. - Who will be involved on such discussion? I'd say the subsystem core maintainers and developers plus the top maintainer and eventually TAB. Feature removal may cause troubles to distro maintainers, as some may have it enabled as well. So, better having more people know in advance. - How this will be documented? Depending on the reasons why a feature is dropped, e.g. if it involves personal data, I don't think the entire process can be transparent, but surely a sanitized summary should be documented. IMHO, the best way to document it is at the patch dropping such feature, which will explain why the feature is removed. IMO, the best would be to have such patch containing SOB from multiple people: - core subsystem developers and maintainers; - Ack or SOB by the top level maintainers, if pertinent. Thanks, Mauro