From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 63614BE0 for ; Thu, 6 Sep 2018 21:37:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-lf1-f66.google.com (mail-lf1-f66.google.com [209.85.167.66]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B9B5E713 for ; Thu, 6 Sep 2018 21:37:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-lf1-f66.google.com with SMTP id r4-v6so10301131lff.12 for ; Thu, 06 Sep 2018 14:37:35 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <1536263073.6012.3.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <1536267088.6012.7.camel@HansenPartnership.com> From: Olof Johansson Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2018 14:37:32 -0700 Message-ID: To: Linus Torvalds Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Cc: James Bottomley , ksummit Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [MAINTAINER TOPIC] Succession Planning: Is It time to Throw Linus Under a Bus? List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 1:59 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 1:51 PM James Bottomley > wrote: >> >> It's happened occasionally, but it's not very traditional. Usually >> when people do a palace coup replacement, the tumbrels are waiting >> outside to cart the old dictator off to their sticky end. > > This has taken a dark turn. > > I do want to point out that I brought the question up last year on the > spot. I didn't get any reaction then. I was thinking me not being > around would have been more conducive to discussion. But whatever. Assuming here that the discussion is NOT about a coup-style immediate takeover, but instead either: 1) Start sharing more work so that you can scale back sometimes, go dive without worrying about internet connectivity etc. or: 2) Prepare for disaster. I know you have yourself said you don't care what happens in case of (2) since you won't be around, but I think the best approach is to get there through (1), if possible. My suggestion if you want this: Have someone start out doing some of the simpler mechanics, starting with merging non-controversial fixes during non-merge window for a cycle or two, and take it from there. It could even initially be a rotation where a few people try it out for a bit of time. Some might realize they hate it and should be able to change their minds without losing face. I think it was two years ago you proposed having someone else substitute for a bit, but I don't know if anyone ever volunteered? You will probably need to approach some of the people you'd trust enough to do it. Some might find it too intimidating, mistakes are going to be fairly visible, and I doubt too many will be excited to volunteer and be turned down, in particular if due to lack of trust. I think all of that will be easier than finding a new solo maintainer available at the strike of disaster -- but even if that's what the goal is, having said person spin up in the same way (i.e. a group of two for now), seems like the most robust approach. -Olof