There are two levels of leadership in the illumos project: Members of the Dev Council, and Request To Integrate (RTI) Advocates.
The Dev Council is a technical steering committee drawn from well-known developers of Solaris, whose role is to make high-level architecture decisions.
|Garrett D'Amore||RackTop Systems|
Advocates are the gatekeepers to the illumos core: they have the ultimate say in what code is accepted, and their primary job is to ensure quality and stability for all illumos users.
Advocates are appointed by the illumos Developer Council.
|Albert Lee||trisk||SoftNAS||Storage, drivers, userland.|
|Dan McDonald||danmcd||Joyent||Cryptography, Networking|
|Garrett D'Amore||gdamore||RackTop Systems||Drivers, etc.|
|Gordon Ross||gwr||Nexenta||CIFS/SMB, VFS layer, ZFS ACLs, etc.|
|Joshua M. Clulow||LeftWing||Joyent||Misc.|
|Robert Mustacchi||rmustacc||Joyent||Virtualization, SMF, PCI, MDB, DTrace, x86 platform, etc.|
Life as an Advocate¶
Contributors send you patches, build results, test results, check results, review results. If you're happy with all of this, you integrate the change on their behalf.
You should have received a diff in hg export or similar format, including a full set of metadata (Reviewed by: lines, authorship, etc.). If you didn't, feel free to ask whoever submitted the patch to submit it in this format, you shouldn't have to go search the list archives for reviewers.
Using your judgment¶
The whole reason we have RTI advocates or, if you're not steeped in Sun-ish history, follow a "pull" model, is that it provides us with a step in the process where in theory experienced people can exercise their (in theory) better judgment, and everyone can benefit from less breakage. This is 95% of the work involved.
Things Advocates Focus On¶
- Do you know the areas of the system affected well enough to even have an opinion?
- If not, you should probably leave this for someone else who might (note that we don't have perfect coverage, so you can't just punt on everything).
- Is the commit well-formed?
- The author line should include both a name and a well formed email address, and should match the actual author. The format here is very important for SCM export. Don't just assume it's fine!
- Is the pbchk output as clean as you want it to be?
- In general, there should be no noise from any check, however some areas are not clean for the various style checks, you should check this is actually the case (in general, areas that are innately dirty are very dirty, and stand out).
- Is the user's build clean?
- Did the user also build with the current shadow compiler? - check the
mail_msgfile for the compilers that were actually used.
- Did the submitter test their changes to your satisfaction?
- Can you think of anything else that should be tested? Ask for it!
- Did the testing actually test the area changed by the patch? Check!
- Read the diff. Check that nothing stands out that reviewers may have missed
- Feel free to run a build yourself, if you're paranoid, but don't feel compelled to.