Since you are going to the effort of changing the CodeOwners file format from what is in LLVM, can you go ahead and add Discourse and Discord handles? It is often very helpful to tag someone on Discourse/Discord. I'll be proposing this change for LLVM soon.
This could be taken to mean every review must have approval from a code owner, on top of whatever other review has been done. Is that the intent? Someone coming from a project with strong maintainer rules (e.g. GDB, so I gather) may take it that way.
Is the extra space an RST thing, seems placed randomly.
I copied this from the Clang CodeOwners.rst with the aim of being consistent, but I'm happy to tweak it. We could qualify the last sentence with something like "when consensus cannot be reached" or if we think "gatekeeper" is too strong of a work maybe we can use "tie-breaker", though I like that the former implies a sense of duty. Happy to take suggestions!
Nope that's just me: I'll clear that up 👍
My understanding was that llvm in general didn't have this hard requirement for an owner to acknowledge every review.
Sounds good to me.
I've suggested some additional/alternative/backup (choose your interpretation) owners for the components I'm listed as the only owner (I only wish I could find someone to take over android). If they accept, then take this as my endorsement to add to or replace me.
Alright, seems like we have consensus. The only person that hasn't chimed in yet is Greg, but based on a comment in another thread he might be OOO. We can alway address concerns post-commit.