From owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org Sun Jul 15 19:26:33 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2214104C4B2 for ; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 19:26:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wlosh@bsdimp.com) Received: from mail-io0-x241.google.com (mail-io0-x241.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::241]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 21B8994C4B for ; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 19:26:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wlosh@bsdimp.com) Received: by mail-io0-x241.google.com with SMTP id v26-v6so35768648iog.5 for ; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 12:26:33 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bsdimp-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=FFTf2O2BFsCJiilB/QnWNPqvlyK+BDdzpsuhgxHn6lk=; b=Q1K4WtwjZyK90IFwRPrypofORe/aq0VVBHRuEGPChdXHAfqKq46JcUrJ7OusZEJ3Z+ evkjDZOhasSrJjKUxYShMpx+MNvbRYxX98RIC8LsML7B/fPo57L+IMlfYejdNkkYhqEz PPLU6Qi++c8H9AeOm8f2hoAnttIzinLRw2emYXrfiNJZANKApamHB/vhcmXhyoGb0YjV gzHc8yvtr5ajz5mxT70XfOCcopP4Y5+uAZH+pSYXR7n3KXWlc6Keb+eybRgZnEUZgCuQ CTrrFVbWgS0s/XWCKD7XYvv96sagAw16D2n59aGvbA3Hkx1/e98+Jhdpyi49jH0YXhKU 4JTA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=FFTf2O2BFsCJiilB/QnWNPqvlyK+BDdzpsuhgxHn6lk=; b=BKGh301zGPlvixAptZjecRSCgJxhltK7eZoCgWQLw2CUybT7dB1g3K1g2v7yXp5Bbi AuGoAZNmxSfPN5N2tEd7IIxBc05Qapi9N+JTvgPOrdPV5CNjwbJfYDgC+ZqUTYu5wcpw VlOPBbhwmUGfzVvpED9VZyD7jJ7nXh96v2/9MziFjPDy2p7brXbR5rVmQa75v0/9posG /Udv9FlW3/2hH9G0aSjCTnA0QK+GpO2Bhu4VVSRP616hEfagwSKinS57bqOZiFStdbU5 gNZXRnfA85pvGtA9fEENqlchX/rvJ/iz5VR4b8ugneccuipKXsM2bCqcJwmvOwN5qLkr oA8A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlEK9AWX3kgwc1y6H/wSWlHglxvz9W+QXab21cRlPN3W5lWr2asA NeG2pNvfYuDQ6HAIzR+cciFSfG9TlZdMOrn0UX7l7+b2 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpd31itumu+pDc+G3OBACD4wddYpJ5hGyeiNVd9I5khkv28a/zV4LHTtK3rik5yeZ/mQEMN/lWOXsLpnTYvlZGo= X-Received: by 2002:a6b:f719:: with SMTP id k25-v6mr7107262iog.37.1531682792309; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 12:26:32 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: wlosh@bsdimp.com Received: by 2002:a4f:1183:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 12:26:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [2603:300b:6:5100:1052:acc7:f9de:2b6d] In-Reply-To: <20180715192307.45EE0ED6@spqr.komquats.com> References: <20180715192307.45EE0ED6@spqr.komquats.com> From: Warner Losh Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2018 13:26:31 -0600 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 1QqV60pAI7XOz22A9hH9A9z3cwE Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] Recent libm additions To: Cy Schubert Cc: Ian Lepore , "K. Macy" , Steve Kargl , FreeBSD Current Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.27 X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2018 19:26:33 -0000 So something like this: diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS index 51d3688f8b8..3e6584f24a1 100644 --- a/MAINTAINERS +++ b/MAINTAINERS @@ -58,6 +58,7 @@ kqueue jmg Pre-commit review requested. Documentation Required. libdpv dteske Pre-commit review requested. Keep in sync with dpv(1). libfetch des Pre-commit review requested, email only. libfigpar dteske Pre-commit review requested. +libm freebsd-numerics Send email with patches to freebsd-numerics@ libpam des Pre-commit review requested, email only. linprocfs des Pre-commit review requested, email only. lpr gad Pre-commit review requested, particularly for is what you're suggesting? Warner On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 1:23 PM, Cy Schubert wrote: > I wasn't saying Steve has a lock however in case non-committers might feel > they do, addressing all points in my reply. Not saying anyone feels this > way today but we should consider this in whatever we decide here > (considering all possibilities). IMO adding subject matter experts to > MAINTAINERS seems like the easiest way to document who might be the go-to > person. > > --- > Sent using a tiny phone keyboard. > Apologies for any typos and autocorrect. > Also, this old phone only supports top post. Apologies. > > Cy Schubert > or > The need of the many outweighs the greed of the few. > --- > ------------------------------ > From: Warner Losh > Sent: 15/07/2018 12:09 > To: Cy Schubert > Cc: Ian Lepore; K. Macy; Steve Kargl; FreeBSD Current > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] Recent libm additions > > I'm not saying that he has a lock. I'm saying he's are domain expert and > many mistakes can be avoided by talking to him. > > I'm saying we have history here, and that history, while poorly > documented, wasn't followed. To the extent it is poorly documented, we > should fix that. > > Warner > > On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 12:43 PM, Cy Schubert > wrote: > >> I don't think it makes sense for a non-committer to have a lock on >> anything in base. However a request for review makes a lot of sense. If a >> non-committer or former committer is the SME on a particular subject it's >> best that they be consulted even if they don't request it. IMO more input >> is better. Where better to document this than in MAINTAINERS. >> >> Having said all this. If a person is a former committer and it's not >> documented, how are we to know? >> >> If people agree, should we start documenting SMEs in MAINTAINERS? >> >> --- >> Sent using a tiny phone keyboard. >> Apologies for any typos and autocorrect. >> Also, this old phone only supports top post. Apologies. >> >> Cy Schubert >> or >> The need of the many outweighs the greed of the few. >> --- >> ------------------------------ >> From: Ian Lepore >> Sent: 15/07/2018 11:08 >> To: Warner Losh; K. Macy >> Cc: Steve Kargl; FreeBSD Current >> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Recent libm additions >> >> On Sun, 2018-07-15 at 11:55 -0600, Warner Losh wrote: >> > On Sun, Jul 15, 2018, 11:23 AM K. Macy wrote: >> > >> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > Well, actually, the functions in polevll.c should have been >> > > > copied >> > > > into ld80/e_powl.c, and polevall.c should never have been >> > > > committed. >> > > > Unfortunately, the code was not reviewed for correctness. >> > > That is not correct. Please stop repeating it. Bruce Evans and John >> > > Baldwin were both looped in. Neither made this observation. >> > > >> > Steve is the fp guy these days. And it wasn't reviewed by him. He's >> > mad you >> > cut him out of the loop. Arguing about pedantic points of process >> > does no >> > one any good. >> > >> > Warner >> >> On the other hand, what information is there for someone to know that >> Steve should be involved in a review? There is nothing in MAINTAINERS. >> The review was on phab for almost a month, and phab is supposedly the >> preferred way to do reviews these days. >> >> Steve is no longer a committer, but that doesn't preclude him having a >> phab account and participating in reviews. If he doesn't like using >> phab (and I can certainly understand that POV), an entry in MAINTAINERS >> would still be helpful, unless we have a rule that only committers can >> be listed in there. >> >> -- Ian >> >> _______________________________________________ >> freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list >> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current >> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org >> " >> >> >