{"thread":{"id":"1343","subject":"Meet the new maintainer..","startedAt":"2005-07-27T03:24:07Z","lastAt":"2005-07-27T06:04:18Z","messageCount":2,"participants":["Linus Torvalds","Junio C Hamano"],"isPatch":false,"patchVersion":null,"patchTotal":null},"messages":[{"id":"6472","messageId":"Pine.LNX.4.58.0507262004320.3227@g5.osdl.org","threadId":"1343","inReplyTo":null,"subject":"Meet the new maintainer..","fromName":"Linus Torvalds","fromEmail":"torvalds@osdl.org","sentAt":"2005-07-27T03:24:07Z","receivedAt":"2005-07-27T03:24:07Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"torvalds@linux-foundation.org","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/1024025?v=4"},"body":"\nI'm sure some of you eagle-eyes have already noticed this, but for the\nlast 24 hours the \"owner\" field on the main git project at www.kernel.org\nhasn't been pointing to yours truly any more. It says \"Junio C Hamano\"  \ninstead.\n\nThe description may still say \"Linus' core git plumbing\", but I think\nthat's just because Junio is being shy about things, and not very \nassertive, but the fact is, in the great tag-game of project \nmaintainership, Junio is the new \"it\".\n\nI always said I didn't really want to maintain it in the long run, and \nmaybe some of you thought I was just saying that, especially as the weeks \ndragged out to over three months, but hey, that's just because this thing \nended up being a bit bigger and more professional than I originally even \nenvisioned. \n\nJunio was the obvious choice, and since he accepted the maintainership \nposition, it means that I don't have to track the git details as closely, \nand can go back to reading the linux kernel mailing list more actively. \n\nI'll just continue to send patches to Junio instead of applying them to my\ntree and pushing them out that way (or maybe I'll try to push any changes\nthrough my slaved git trees instead). In other words, I'm not \"dropping\" \ngit, I just prefer working on it as a contributor rather than trying to \nkeep track of everything that happens.\n\nSo I don't think much will change, except I suspect Junio will drop fewer\npatches on the floor and ask for fewer re-sends or need less prodding ;)\n\n\t\tLinus\n"},{"id":"6473","messageId":"7vmzo8ss2l.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net","threadId":"1343","inReplyTo":"Pine.LNX.4.58.0507262004320.3227@g5.osdl.org","subject":"A note from the new GIT maintainer","fromName":"Junio C Hamano","fromEmail":"junkio@cox.net","sentAt":"2005-07-27T06:04:18Z","receivedAt":"2005-07-27T06:04:18Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"gitster@pobox.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/54884?v=4"},"body":"As some of you seem to have noticed even before the announcement\nby Linus, the official GIT repository at kernel.org is now owned\nby me.  As Linus said in his message, this does not mean he is\nleaving us, so please do not panic.\n\nI would like to thank everybody on the GIT list for what we have\nachieved so far.  Getting your ideas blown away and still being\nable to feel happy about it is a privilege granted only to those\nwho are fortunate enough to work with very talented people.  It\nhas been quite a fun experience for me.\n\nI would also like to thank Twin Sun Inc (my employer) and NEC\nfor promising to support me working on GIT on a part time basis\nfrom now on.  I expect to be spending 8 to 12 day-job hours per\nweek; evenings and weekends are my own time as before.  My\ntentative plan is to make Wednesdays and Saturdays my primary\nGIT days.\n\nEarlier, I was producing as many patches as ideas cross my mind,\nthrowing all of them at the list to see which ones stick,\nrelying on somebody with a good taste upstream to drop all the\nbad ones.  Although it has been fun working that way with Linus,\nregrettably, I ended up wasting a lot of his time.\n\nI will slow down and be more careful as the \"shepherd of the\nmain repository\" from now on.  At least for now, you will see\npatches from me posted on the list like everybody else's, before\nthey hit the main repository.\n\nIn other words, I will make you my \"adult supervision,\" so\nplease help me out by raising objections, giving alternatives,\nor just plainly saying \"your patch is ugly\".\n\nSome of you may have also noticed that the main GIT repository\nhas an extra branch, \"pu\" (\"proposed updates\").  My patches,\nalong with patches from others I collect from the list that I\nintend to eventually apply, will first go there, before hitting\nthe master branch.  You can probably tell, by looking at this\nbranch, what my priorities are, which patches are being\nconsidered, and responses to which ones I am still waiting for.\nPlease note that I expect to rewind and rebase this branch quite\noften.\n\nI was planning to talk about the remaining tasks for 1.0 in this\nmessage when Linus asked me if I wanted to take over the core\nGIT project a couple of weeks ago.  But I think we have done\nmost, if not all, of what we would want to have in 1.0 since\nthen.  Of course there are still ongoing discussions for various\nimprovements, but I feel that that can continue without blocking\nthe 1.0 pre-release engineering process.  Please keep bugfixes\nand documentation updates flowing.\n\nAfter the 1.0 release, I plan to start a branch for 1.0\nmaintenance, separate from the \"master\" branch.  I think the\nintent of having GIT RPM support, which was done before me, was\nto force Pasky's hand to split core part from the Cogito\npackage, but as the prerequisite for the split to happen, the\ninterface to the core GIT part must be reasonably stable.  We\noperated without even having any formal version numbers for\nquite some time, which I am sure made Pasky's life more\nmiserable then it should have been.  This must be rectified.\n\nI have not decided if we want to use even-odd scheme like the\nkernel used to have, or just keep the \"master\" a bleeding edge\nbranch which is occasionally tagged.\n\nThat's about it from me for now.  Let's continue to have fun!\n"}]}