Cornelia Huck <cohuck(a)redhat.com> writes:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 09:54:12 +0200
Thomas Huth <thuth(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> On 16.07.2018 09:32, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> > Libvirt developers would like to be copied on patches to qemu-doc
> > appendix "Deprecated features". Do them the favor.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru(a)redhat.com>
> > ---
> > MAINTAINERS | 4 ++++
> > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
> > index 20eef3cb61..666e936812 100644
> > --- a/MAINTAINERS
> > +++ b/MAINTAINERS
> > @@ -2194,6 +2194,10 @@ M: Daniel P. Berrange <berrange(a)redhat.com>
> > S: Odd Fixes
> > F: docs/devel/build-system.txt
> >
> > +Incompatible changes
> > +R: libvir-list(a)redhat.com
> > +F: qemu-deprecated.texi
>
> Should we have a maintainer for the file, too? (I guess not, because
> deprecation patches should go through the specific subsystems...)
I don't think adding a maintainer makes sense for this file.
This MAINTAINERS entry doesn't declare maintainers, only reviewers.
We can change that if a maintainer steps up.
> And what about a "S:" line?
I don't think that makes too much sense, either.
If anything, qemu-deprecated.texi should be in a category 'maintained
by everybody', i.e. qemu-devel. Just like qemu-doc.texi, which does not
have an entry in MAINTAINERS at all.
Just like all the other files that lack a maintainer.