[Policy] Replace "code owners" with "maintainers" #107384
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This replaces the previous Code Owners section of our developer policy with a new section for Maintainers. It also updates most of the places we mention "code owner" in the documentation (it does not update the files named `Code Owners.rst` or similar because those should be updated when the subprojects add their `Maintainers.rst` file). Please see the RFC for more details: https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-proposing-changes-to-the-community-code-ownership-policy/80714/
AaronBallman
requested review from
nikic,
MaskRay,
sscalpone,
ldionne,
JDevlieghere,
vitalybuka and
joker-eph
nikic
approved these changes
Sep 5, 2024
| @@ -328,17 +328,17 @@ Release Patch Rules | |||
| Below are the rules regarding patching the release branch: | |||
|
|
|||
| #. Patches applied to the release branch may only be applied by the release | |||
| manager, the official release testers or the code owners with approval from | |||
| manager, the official release testers or the maintainers with approval from | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Unrelated side note: I think that nowadays only release managers can merge to release branches.
JDevlieghere
approved these changes
Sep 5, 2024
vitalybuka
approved these changes
Sep 6, 2024
jh7370
reviewed
Sep 11, 2024
MaskRay
approved these changes
Sep 13, 2024
jh7370
approved these changes
Sep 13, 2024
nikic
added a commit
to nikic/llvm-project
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 27, 2024
Following https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-proposing-changes-to-the-community-code-ownership-policy/80714 and llvm#107384, this PR moves the llvm CODE_OWNERS.txt to the Maintainers.rst file. The format of the Maintainers.rst file follows the current CodeOwners.rst from clang, with some minor changes to account for the code owners -> maintainers migration. This change is intended to be a pure format change, without changing any actual code owners / maintainers. The list is still very badly outdated. The intent here is to get the format change out of the way, so we can get proper diffs when replacing no longer active maintainers. If we mix both together, it will be hard to follow what actually changed. I've tried to categorize things as best as I could, and filled in GitHub handles for people where I knew them or could determine them with some confidence.
nikic
added a commit
to nikic/llvm-project
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 27, 2024
Following https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-proposing-changes-to-the-community-code-ownership-policy/80714 and llvm#107384, this PR moves the llvm CODE_OWNERS.txt to the Maintainers.rst file. The format of the Maintainers.rst file follows the current CodeOwners.rst from clang, with some minor changes to account for the code owners -> maintainers migration. This change is intended to be a pure format change, without changing any actual code owners / maintainers. The list is still very badly outdated. The intent here is to get the format change out of the way, so we can get proper diffs when replacing no longer active maintainers. If we mix both together, it will be hard to follow what actually changed. I've tried to categorize things as best as I could, and filled in GitHub handles for people where I knew them or could determine them with some confidence.
nikic
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 4, 2024
Following https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-proposing-changes-to-the-community-code-ownership-policy/80714 and #107384, this PR moves the llvm CODE_OWNERS.txt to the Maintainers.md file. The general format of the Maintainers.md file follows the current CodeOwners.rst from clang, with some minor terminology changes to account for the code owners -> maintainers migration. This change is intended to be a pure format change, without changing any actual code owners / maintainers. The list is still very badly outdated. The intent here is to get the format change out of the way, so we can get proper diffs when replacing no longer active maintainers. If we mix both together, it will be hard to follow what actually changed. I've tried to categorize things as best as I could, and filled in GitHub handles for people where I knew them or could determine them with some confidence.
DavidSpickett
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 14, 2024
To align with the new policy: https://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#maintainers I've assumed that Jonas will be the "Lead Maintainer" as he was the default Code Owner. I know the past Code Owners weren't "Maintainers" but it's the same energy so I've changed it there too. See also: #107384 / https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-proposing-changes-to-the-community-code-ownership-policy/80714
DanielCChen
pushed a commit
to DanielCChen/llvm-project
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 16, 2024
To align with the new policy: https://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#maintainers I've assumed that Jonas will be the "Lead Maintainer" as he was the default Code Owner. I know the past Code Owners weren't "Maintainers" but it's the same energy so I've changed it there too. See also: llvm#107384 / https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-proposing-changes-to-the-community-code-ownership-policy/80714
bricknerb
pushed a commit
to bricknerb/llvm-project
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 17, 2024
To align with the new policy: https://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#maintainers I've assumed that Jonas will be the "Lead Maintainer" as he was the default Code Owner. I know the past Code Owners weren't "Maintainers" but it's the same energy so I've changed it there too. See also: llvm#107384 / https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-proposing-changes-to-the-community-code-ownership-policy/80714
EricWF
pushed a commit
to efcs/llvm-project
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 22, 2024
To align with the new policy: https://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#maintainers I've assumed that Jonas will be the "Lead Maintainer" as he was the default Code Owner. I know the past Code Owners weren't "Maintainers" but it's the same energy so I've changed it there too. See also: llvm#107384 / https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-proposing-changes-to-the-community-code-ownership-policy/80714
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This replaces the previous Code Owners section of our developer policy with a new section for Maintainers. It also updates most of the places we mention "code owner" in the documentation (it does not update the files named
Code Owners.rstor similar because those should be updated when the subprojects add theirMaintainers.rstfile).The wording was taken from what was proposed in the RFC (including all suggested amendments from folks on the thread).
Please see the RFC for more details:
https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-proposing-changes-to-the-community-code-ownership-policy/80714/