On 3/28/2023 11:00 AM, Guo, Junfeng wrote: > + Rushil Gupta <rush...@google.com> > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Guo, Junfeng <junfeng....@intel.com> >> Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2023 17:45 >> To: Zhang, Qi Z <qi.z.zh...@intel.com>; Wu, Jingjing >> <jingjing...@intel.com>; ferruh.yi...@amd.com; Xing, Beilei >> <beilei.x...@intel.com> >> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Guo, Junfeng <junfeng....@intel.com> >> Subject: [PATCH v3 3/3] net/gve: add maintainers for GVE >> >> Add maintainers from Google for GVE. >> >> Signed-off-by: Junfeng Guo <junfeng....@intel.com> >> --- >> MAINTAINERS | 3 +++ >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS >> index 1a33ad8592..988c7aecfa 100644 >> --- a/MAINTAINERS >> +++ b/MAINTAINERS >> @@ -714,6 +714,9 @@ F: doc/guides/nics/features/enic.ini >> >> Google Virtual Ethernet >> M: Junfeng Guo <junfeng....@intel.com> >> +M: Jeroen de Borst <jeroe...@google.com> >> +M: Rushil Gupta <rush...@google.com> >> +M: Joshua Washington <joshw...@google.com> >> F: drivers/net/gve/ >> F: doc/guides/nics/gve.rst >> F: doc/guides/nics/features/gve.ini
New maintainers were not part of the upstreaming process, so we don't know much about the engagement and commitment level of them. However, as far as I understand they are the base code owners, which means we can trust their technical expertise that is why good to have them on board. Primarily for due diligence, would it be OK to get explicit Ack from the new maintainers, to confirm they are aware of and agree to the responsibilities they are accepting?
