4 This file lists the maintainers for subsystems in Samba. Please see
5 the end of the file for information on how the maintainers system
6 works. If you can't work out who the maintainer is for some code,
7 please ask on the samba-technical list or on the samba-technical IRC
11 =======================================================================
13 directory: lib/tevent/
15 Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org>
17 All commits require review by the maintainer.
19 If no maintainer is available for longer than a week
20 discussion on the samba-technical list and review by 2
21 Samba-Team members is needed (e.g. Andrew Tridgell <tridge@samba.org>
22 and Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>).
24 Larger changes need also discussion on the samba-technical list
25 and review by all maintainers.
27 directory: lib/tsocket/
29 Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org>
31 All commits require review by the maintainer.
33 If no maintainer is available for longer than a week
34 discussion on the samba-technical list and review by 2
35 Samba-Team members is needed.
37 Larger changes need also discussion on the samba-technical list
38 and review by all maintainers.
41 files: lib/tevent/py*, lib/talloc/py*, source4/lib/ldb/py*, lib/tdb/py*
43 Jelmer Vernooij <jelmer@samba.org>
45 Larger commits require pre-push review by the maintainer or
46 one of the maintainers of the containing subsystem.
48 Other non-trivial (typo, etc) commits require pre- or post-push review by the
49 maintainer or one of the maintainers of the containing subsystem.
52 =======================================================================
54 Samba Maintainers System
55 ------------------------
57 The Samba project has adopted a maintainers system, with the following
60 - we have created a new 'MAINTAINERS.txt' file in the root of the git
63 - that file will contain a list of subsystems, and along with each
64 subsystem a list of maintainers
66 - subsystems may be subdirectories, or logical groups of files (for
67 example "build system" or "selftest" could be subsystems that span
70 - if a subsystem is not listed in the MAINTAINERS.txt file, then this
71 maintainers proposal does not apply to that subsystem. The previous
72 Samba development methods apply to unlisted subsystems.
74 - when we first create the MAINTAINERS.txt it will be empty, thus on
75 the first day of adoption there is no actual change to our
78 - we will add subsystems to the MAINTAINERS.txt file via consensus
79 within the Samba Team. This means that someone would propose
80 themselves, or another team member, as a subsystem maintainer, and
81 if there are no objections then they can push a change to the
82 maintainers file after a couple of days waiting for replies. If
83 there is an existing maintainer for that subsystem then at minimum
84 the person proposing should wait for a positive ack from the
87 - a typical subsystem declaration would be:
91 Andrew Bartlett <abartlet@samba.org>
92 Andrew Tridgell <tridge@samba.org>
94 small commits to master allowed if all existing tests
95 pass. Larger commits require discussion on samba-technical
96 list and review by the maintainer
98 - the maintainers for a subsystem may update the policy for that
99 subsystem at any time by pushing a commit to the MAINTAINERS.txt
100 file. Significant changes should also be sent to the
101 samba-technical list to ensure that all developers are aware of the
104 - a subsystem may have multiple maintainers, and it is expected that
105 this will be the case for many of our subsystems.
107 - a maintainer may delegate responsibility to someone else for a
108 period of time (such as during rapid development or when the
109 maintainer is away). A maintainer may also appoint a backup
110 maintainer. These changes should be noted in the maintainers file,
111 and removed when no longer relevent.
113 - maintainer handover would happen by agreement between the old and
114 new maintainer, and is signified by a commit to the MAINTAINERS.txt
115 file. If agreement cannot be reached then we can resolve the
116 disagreement using discussions on the team list. If agreement still
117 can't be reached then the maintainer won't change.
119 What does it mean to be a maintainer?
120 -------------------------------------
122 If you are a maintainer for a subsystem then you have some additional
123 rights and responsibilies for that code. Specifically:
125 - you should make time to review any proposed changes to any
126 subsystems that you maintain. You should then provide feedback on
127 proposed changes or sign off on the changes once you are happy with
130 - you may choose the policy for the subsystems you maintain. That
131 policy could be a permissive one, where you allow for small changes
132 without review, or it could be a strict one, where you only allow
133 reviewed changes to be pushed.
135 - being a maintainer for a subsystem does not override the "right of
136 veto" of other team members for technical objections. See the
137 "right of veto" section below for more information.
139 - the maintainers can set the developmental direction of the
140 subsystem, but should strive to achieve concensus where possible
141 with other team members for the benefit of the whole
144 Note that if you set a permissive policy on your subsystem, so that
145 small changes may be pushed without review, you are still responsible
146 for reviewing changes if someone specifically asks you to review a
149 Try to reuse policy wording
150 ---------------------------
152 It would be good if we end up with only a few sets of policy wording,
153 rather than a completely different policy for each subsystem. To try
154 to achieve that, maintainers should try to re-use an existing policy
161 Over the last few years the Samba Team has started to use a +1/-1
162 voting system, which was inspired by the Apache voting system for
163 technical issues (see http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html).
165 For the maintainers proposal to work, I think we need to ensure that
166 everyone understands what a -1 "veto" vote means on a technical issue.
168 For purely technical issues, the +1/-1 voting system should not be a
169 "most votes wins" system. Instead a single -1 vote is supposed to
170 override any number of +1 votes, so a -1 vote is a "veto", and all
171 team members have the right to give a -1 veto vote on any purely
174 Along with the right to give a -1 veto vote comes the responsibility
175 to backup that veto with a technical argument, and the willingness to
176 then defend your argument in any subsequent discussions and to work
177 with the patch proposer to find a solution. If you do not backup your
178 -1 veto vote, or you are unwilling on unable to participate in any
179 discussions that arise from that veto, then the veto vote may be
182 Note that a veto is supposed to be used only for purely technical
183 reasons, so for example pointing out a security concern with a change,
184 or pointing out that the code may segfault or cause a regression of