[PATCH] sunxi: MAINTAINERS: drop myself

[Tom Rini]

On Thu, Aug 03, 2023 at 07:16:35PM +0530, Jagan Teki wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 3, 2023 at 7:05 PM Andre Przywara <andre.przywara at arm.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 3 Aug 2023 09:13:44 -0400
> > Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Tom,
> >
> > thanks for the heads up, somehow the original email didn't reach me.
> >
> > > On Thu, Aug 03, 2023 at 04:50:34PM +0900, FUKAUMI Naoki wrote:
> > >
> > > > I no longer maintain them.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: FUKAUMI Naoki <naobsd at gmail.com>
> > >
> > > Thanks for your time on these platforms.
> > >
> > > Reviewed-by: Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com>
> > >
> > > Andre, Jagan, which one of you wants to pick these up? I assume you
> > > don't want to drop the defconfigs themselves.
> >
> > To be honest, I am more inclined to delete that whole file. Given its age
> > and the (natural and understandable) volatility of engagement for those
> > boards I don't think there is much actual information in there anymore than
> > "person originally submitted the *_defconfig" (which we have in the git
> > log).
> > For instance I think that Hans retreated from day-to-day sunxi
> > engagement years ago, and I wonder if he even still possesses all of these
> > boards listed under his name - which was more of a catch-all anyway, IIUC.
> >
> > So it's either that (which is certainly easier), or I write to everyone on
> > the list and ask for an update on the support situation. Because I also
> > feel that only a small fraction of these boards receives some testing, so
> > wouldn't be surprised to find many of them broken for a while - given the
> > refactoring we did lately.
> >
> > But please note that I don't intend to drop any of the defconfigs
> > unnecessarily, so just because we *believe* they are unsupported.
> >
> > Any opinions?
> 
> What if we categorize the defconfigs into active and inactive based on
> the maintainer's activites and give them some release threshold to
> drop or mark it (re)active like we did it for DM conversion?

Orphaned / unmaintained defconfigs are a CI failure normally, they just
aren't right this moment because that got broken a while back (and so
I'm trying to fix that now, and prevent new breakage from coming in).

-- 
Tom
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 659 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20230803/d843f3bf/attachment.sig>