Re: [MAINTAINER SUMMIT] Adding more formality around feature inclusion and ejection

[Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>]

On Fri, Aug 22, 2025 at 01:39:35PM +0200, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> On a side note: I never used myself bcachefs, and I'm not aware of its
> current status and how much it depends on the current maintainer.
> 
> Yet, IMO, I don't like the idea that, if a maintainer leaves the
> project for whatever reason (including misbehavior), features would
> be excluded - even if they're experimental.
> 
> So, I'd say that, except if we would be willing to face legal issues, 
> or the feature is really bad, the best would be to give at least one
> or two kernel cycles to see if someone else steps up - and if the
> feature is experimental(*), perhaps move it to staging while nobody
> steps up.

Kent is bcachefs.  There's no team who might be able to step up, and
while the code is certainly clear enough, anyone who takes it over will
have to deal with Kent, an army of internet trolls and having to learn
an incredibly complex codebase.  I wouldn't wish that on anyone.