Add initial set of sub directory OWNERS file

Add initial set of sub directory OWNERS file

BUG=none
R=danno@chromium.org
LOG=n

Committed: https://crrev.com/83f827a00b552de4f3289c9afa09b49422514ab1
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#27579}

[Sven Panne, 2015-02-27 08:39:13]

svenpanne@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ svenpanne@chromium.org

[Sven Panne, 2015-02-27 08:39:14]

Quick, highly subjective DBC... :-)

In general I think there should be at least 2-3 owners, otherwise we will have
problems with people being ill, coming in around noon, leaving shorty after
lunch, etc. (I intentionally left out names here :-)

https://codereview.chromium.org/960903003/diff/1/src/compiler/OWNERS
File src/compiler/OWNERS (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/960903003/diff/1/src/compiler/OWNERS#newcode6
src/compiler/OWNERS:6: titzer@chromium.org
Add myself.

https://codereview.chromium.org/960903003/diff/1/src/ic/OWNERS
File src/ic/OWNERS (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/960903003/diff/1/src/ic/OWNERS#newcode2
src/ic/OWNERS:2: verwaest@chromium.org
Add Jakob and/or Igor, too?

https://codereview.chromium.org/960903003/diff/1/src/libplatform/OWNERS
File src/libplatform/OWNERS (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/960903003/diff/1/src/libplatform/OWNERS#newcode1
src/libplatform/OWNERS:1: jochen@chromium.org
1 reviewer is insufficient IMHO, add Benedikt and/or myself?

[Benedikt Meurer, 2015-02-27 08:44:21]

bmeurer@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ bmeurer@chromium.org

[Benedikt Meurer, 2015-02-27 08:44:21]

https://codereview.chromium.org/960903003/diff/1/src/ic/OWNERS
File src/ic/OWNERS (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/960903003/diff/1/src/ic/OWNERS#newcode2
src/ic/OWNERS:2: verwaest@chromium.org
+1

https://codereview.chromium.org/960903003/diff/1/src/libplatform/OWNERS
File src/libplatform/OWNERS (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/960903003/diff/1/src/libplatform/OWNERS#newcode1
src/libplatform/OWNERS:1: jochen@chromium.org
yeah, you can add me there.

[rossberg, 2015-02-27 08:54:47]

rossberg@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ rossberg@chromium.org

[rossberg, 2015-02-27 08:54:48]

https://codereview.chromium.org/960903003/diff/1/src/compiler/OWNERS
File src/compiler/OWNERS (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/960903003/diff/1/src/compiler/OWNERS#newcode6
src/compiler/OWNERS:6: titzer@chromium.org
On 2015/02/27 08:39:13, Sven Panne wrote:
> Add myself.

And me as well.

[jochen (gone - plz use gerrit), 2015-02-27 08:56:07]

as mentioned on the thread, I didn't intend to get the list right, just to have
a starting point.

I don't think I'm in a good position to judge who should be in the owners file
for compiler for example, maybe Ben can sort that out once this has landed?

[jochen (gone - plz use gerrit), 2015-02-27 08:56:39]

altneratively, I could just add one person per owners file (probably the TL of
the respective areas) and that person figures this out?

[Michael Starzinger, 2015-02-27 09:05:04]

mstarzinger@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ mstarzinger@chromium.org

[Michael Starzinger, 2015-02-27 09:05:05]

https://codereview.chromium.org/960903003/diff/1/src/heap/OWNERS
File src/heap/OWNERS (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/960903003/diff/1/src/heap/OWNERS#newcode3
src/heap/OWNERS:3: ulan@chromium.org
Add me please.

[jochen (gone - plz use gerrit), 2015-02-27 09:20:02]

there you go. this CL is about adding OWNERS files at all.

who should go into the files should be a second step :)

[jochen (gone - plz use gerrit), 2015-02-27 09:21:16]

(also note that the top-level owner file still overrides everything, so even if
we end up with a single person in a subdir, this won't block anybody when that
person is unavailable)

[Dmitry Lomov (no reviews), 2015-02-27 09:42:20]

On 2015/02/27 09:21:16, jochen (slow) wrote:
> (also note that the top-level owner file still overrides everything, so even
if
> we end up with a single person in a subdir, this won't block anybody when that
> person is unavailable)

Sounds like there is a lot of feelings about who owns what on this CL. 
My understanding is OWNERS in subdirs is just an advisory about suggested
experts in the area (since many people are at loss about who are the right
reviewers), not a blocking "only land after I approve" requirement.
From comments on this CL, I get a feeling that some people perceive that
differently though - I hope my feeling is off though.

[jochen (gone - plz use gerrit), 2015-02-27 09:48:11]

On 2015/02/27 at 09:42:20, dslomov wrote:
> On 2015/02/27 09:21:16, jochen (slow) wrote:
> > (also note that the top-level owner file still overrides everything, so even
if
> > we end up with a single person in a subdir, this won't block anybody when
that
> > person is unavailable)
> 
> Sounds like there is a lot of feelings about who owns what on this CL. 
> My understanding is OWNERS in subdirs is just an advisory about suggested
experts in the area (since many people are at loss about who are the right
reviewers), not a blocking "only land after I approve" requirement.
> From comments on this CL, I get a feeling that some people perceive that
differently though - I hope my feeling is off though.

the intend of this CL is to have advisory OWNERS (and that's how the tools will
handle it)

[Dmitry Lomov (no reviews), 2015-02-27 09:50:59]

On 2015/02/27 09:48:11, jochen (slow) wrote:
> On 2015/02/27 at 09:42:20, dslomov wrote:
> > On 2015/02/27 09:21:16, jochen (slow) wrote:
> > > (also note that the top-level owner file still overrides everything, so
even
> if
> > > we end up with a single person in a subdir, this won't block anybody when
> that
> > > person is unavailable)
> > 
> > Sounds like there is a lot of feelings about who owns what on this CL. 
> > My understanding is OWNERS in subdirs is just an advisory about suggested
> experts in the area (since many people are at loss about who are the right
> reviewers), not a blocking "only land after I approve" requirement.
> > From comments on this CL, I get a feeling that some people perceive that
> differently though - I hope my feeling is off though.
> 
> the intend of this CL is to have advisory OWNERS (and that's how the tools
will
> handle it)

I get the intent - I just want to make sure that all team members interpret the
intent correctly. 
There are tools but then there's team culture. Being clear on the latter is more
important than tools.

[danno, 2015-02-27 12:18:32]

Could we please move this discussion to the team group email so that the
motivation behind whatever this CL ends up being is very transparent?

[Benedikt Meurer, 2015-03-09 05:33:01]

bmeurer@chromium.org changed reviewers:
- bmeurer@chromium.org

[jochen (gone - plz use gerrit), 2015-04-01 14:30:06]

jochen@chromium.org changed reviewers:
- mstarzinger@chromium.org, rossberg@chromium.org, svenpanne@chromium.org

[jochen (gone - plz use gerrit), 2015-04-01 14:30:06]

ptal

[danno, 2015-04-02 08:32:22]

lgtm

[jochen (gone - plz use gerrit), 2015-04-02 08:34:07]

The CQ bit was checked by jochen@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-04-02 08:34:15]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/960903003/40001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-04-02 08:46:23]

Committed patchset #3 (id:40001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-04-02 08:46:38]

Patchset 3 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/83f827a00b552de4f3289c9afa09b49422514ab1
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#27579}