[cgl_discussion] minutes of PoC concall

Skip Ford skip.ford at verizon.net
Thu Nov 7 12:45:30 PST 2002

Rod.VanMeter at nokia.com wrote:
> (not a formal set of minutes, just my notes.  If you want
> better ones, volunteer to take them :-).

Thank you for sharing the notes with those of us out of the loop.

> Mika: By December 4, this should all be running smoothly.  New
> developer will go up in a couple of weeks, so we should have FSes
> defined by then.

A list of FSes was posted to one of these lists lately, and I have some
questions.  First of all, I guess that list was a proposal only?

But more importantly, many of the items on the list seem to be listed
with a different potential maintainer than the person/group that wrote
the code (assuming we're talking about the same code that I've seen.)

For example, OSDL is listed as potential maintainers of FS6 "Tools"
which contains Dprobes.  IBM is listed as a potential maintainer for
FS8 "Scalability" so they're participating...why aren't they
potential maintainers of Dprobes?

Similarly, RedHat is listed as a potential maintainer for
FS2 "Networking #1" but code that I think came from RedHat is listed as
potentially maintained by MontaVista in FS7 "Performance".

Quite a few other projects are in a similar situation on that list.
So I guess my question is why?


More information about the cgl_discussion mailing list