[LLVMdev] RFC: Code Ownership
baldrick at free.fr
Mon Nov 12 09:35:49 CST 2012
On 12/11/12 15:11, Meador Inge wrote:
> On 11/11/2012 11:58 PM, Chris Lattner wrote:
>>> Is there a particular sub-system size that makes sense to mark as owned? I have been
>>> reworking the library call simplification infrastructure recently and will be happy
>>> to sign up as an owner for that.
>> I think that "directory level" is the right granularity. If you're interested in signing
>> up to maintain and review the whole instcombine library, that would be a great level. To
>> see what this entails, see:
> I am interested and comfortable with that. I will wait a few days and then
> update CODE_OWNERS.TXT.
while I think it's great that Meador is stepping forward to help out here, it
does bring up the question of how expert you have to be to become a code owner.
As far as I know (please correct me if I'm wrong) Meador isn't the number 1 LLVM
instcombine expert, but instead is someone who knows instcombine fairly well
and is willing to spend time making sure instcombine is in good shape and stays
that way. My take is that you should be able to be a code owner without being
the ultimate über hacker for that subsystem, since (1) the über hackers will
have their eye on you and will let you know if you get it wrong; and (2) being
willing counts for a lot. More power to volunteers! Hopefully if people talk
with each other, help each other out, and maintain a friendly and cooperative
atmosphere then all problems with code ownership will just come out in the wash.
However another take on the whole code owner thing is that the code owner is
the person who has the final say on what goes in and what doesn't, so it is
important for the code owner to be the über guru (and having other people
override their decisions would just undermine their authority and the whole
code owner system). Personally I don't really buy this, but I can understand
Maybe Chris should give his take on the whole code owner thing?
More information about the LLVMdev