Re: [dpdk-dev] Back-up committers for subtrees

["De Lara Guarch, Pablo" <pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>]

Hi,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of De Lara Guarch,
> Pablo
> Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2018 11:05 AM
> To: dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: [dpdk-dev] Back-up committers for subtrees
> 
> Hi everyone,
> 
> In the last few releases, the DPDK community has experienced a significant
> growth, specifically in patches submitted and integrated.
> Therefore, the number of subtrees has increased, to help maintain the
> scalability.
> 
> Section 5.3 of the Contributor's guide
> (http://dpdk.org/doc/guides/contributing/patches.html), Maintainers and
> Sub-trees, states that there should be a backup maintainer per subtree:
> 
> "Ensure that there is a designated back-up maintainer and coordinate a
> handover for periods where the tree maintainer can't perform their roles."
> 
> However, this is not the case for some of the subtrees. This could lead to
> patch integration delays in case of unavailability (short or long term) of the
> subtree committer, especially on busy times, which could lead to a delay in
> an RC release.
> 
> My suggestion is that every primary subtree committer proposes a back-up
> committer for their subtree.
> Once the proposed person agrees on taking this role, they should follow the
> procedure explained in the documentation:
> 
> 
> "Tree maintainers can be added or removed by submitting a patch to the
> MAINTAINERS file.
> 
> The proposer should justify the need for a new sub-tree and should have
> demonstrated a sufficient level of contributions in the area or to a similar
> area.
> 
> The maintainer should be confirmed by an ack from an existing tree
> maintainer. Disagreements on trees or maintainers can be brought to the
> Technical Board.
> 
> 
> 
> The backup maintainer for the master tree should be selected from the
> existing sub-tree maintainers from the project.
> 
> The backup maintainer for a sub-tree should be selected from among the
> component maintainers within that sub-tree."
> 
> The patches will be merged mainly by the primary committer, except when
> this is unavailable, in which case, the back-up committer will take over,
> after this unavailability is communicated between the two committers.
> This implies that there will be no co-maintainership, to maintain a single
> point of contact with the mainline tree maintainer.
> 
> Any objections?

CC'ing Tech board. Could this be discussed in the next meeting?

Thanks,
Pablo

> 
> Thanks,
> Pablo
>