[LLVMdev] Code Owner for OpenMP (runtime)

[Andrey Bokhanko]

Renato,

Well said!

...and thank you for being a code owner yourself! -- this is indeed a
thankless work that should be appreciated by everyone (even if you own
ARM back-end ;-))

Yours,
Andrey


On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 1:39 PM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote:
> On 1 May 2015 at 10:11, Andrey Bokhanko <andreybokhanko at gmail.com> wrote:
>> While I'm always happy to see more maintainers (which means better
>> chance to get code reviewed!) and Hal is an all-around good guy, this,
>> IMHO, sets a bad and dangerous precedent.
>
> Hi Andrey,
>
> I'm in no way affiliated with Intel, if anything, we're fierce
> competitors! :) But I totally agree with you.
>
> This has nothing to do with which company owns what, since code owners
> don't really own anything.
>
> For example, I am the code owner of ARM on the Linux side, Evan Cheng
> is owner of the ARM on the Darwin side. Go back and count how many ARM
> commits were reviewed and approved without our review. While you're at
> it, count how many times other people trumped me on ARM reviews,
> because they knew better, or because they were right and I was wrong,
> or just because more people agreed with their solution.
>
> Being a code owner doesn't mean you can do anything with it. It also
> doesn't mean you can commit anything to your hearts' desire. It means
> you're the poor bastard that will have to scrape unreviewed
> submissions if no one else wants to. It means you'll have to stick
> your head into arguments to try and calm people down, and probably get
> burned along the way. It's a thankless job, it doesn't fare in my
> "annual review", it makes enemies more than friends, and it frequently
> interrupts my other duties.
>
> Search the list and you'll see a lot of code owners asking for review
> on their patches on code they own. Why? Because it involves more than
> just a silly change, or an obvious fix, and it probably needs design
> of other parts of the compiler to change. Code owners have to be
> responsible for the quality all code, which most of the time means ask
> other people what they think, getting consensus. It's about the work
> you put in, not where you're from.
>
> There's no reason why Churbanov shouldn't be the code owner. Poor Andrey... :)
>
> cheers,
> --renato