From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Konstantin Ryabitsev Subject: Re: [X-POST] patchwork.sourceware.org refresh Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2019 11:52:22 -0500 Message-ID: <20191209165222.oanyqa7s73gzz6yd@chatter.i7.local> References: <78c774ef-9f9c-3339-aeb8-84636ee94360@gotplt.org> <87y2vnxbk2.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> <20191208122116.ae5wl4eytedt54vg@wittgenstein> <821c81bd-3c9a-0d33-ffbe-924de796dc7e@gotplt.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Return-path: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <821c81bd-3c9a-0d33-ffbe-924de796dc7e@gotplt.org> To: Siddhesh Poyarekar Cc: Christian Brauner , Florian Weimer , GLIBC Devel , gdb-patches@sourceware.org, help-guix@gnu.org List-Id: help-guix.gnu.org On Mon, Dec 09, 2019 at 01:26:16PM +0530, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote: > On 08/12/19 5:51 pm, Christian Brauner wrote: > >> Maybe we can use for temporary > >> hosting? It already covers some non-kernel lists. > > > > If this is an option you'd probably need to talk to Konstantin about > > this. Hi, all: I'm not sure it makes that much sense to put glibc on patchwork.kernel.org. I know we have some non-kernel projects there, but they are pretty tiny and were approved largely because they wouldn't make much of an impact on kernel.org infra. The same wouldn't be true for glibc, especially if we're talking bot and CI integration. It really needs to stay on its own dedicated infrastructure where it can be properly scoped and resourced. Sorry that I don't have a better answer. Best, -K