Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 22 Jan 2014 13:27:28 +0100 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [tip:core/urgent] MAINTAINERS: Restore "L: " entries |
| |
* Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote:
> Also, SubmittingPatches had and still has: > > 6) Select your CC (e-mail carbon copy) list. > > Unless you have a reason NOT to do so, CC linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org. > > Arguably, that same info should be added to the > MAINTAINERS header instead of each section.
You have cut out my main argument from you reply and have ignored it:
>> In hindsight removing all the "L: lkml" entries was probably not >> an overly good idea, not all mechanic duplication should be >> eliminated: in files read by humans it's useful to have 'at a >> glance' summary for all email addresses important to a subsystem's >> maintenance, in a single place, without too many imported rules >> and assumptions.
Which is not a very honest way to conduct discussions :-(
That section replies to most of your arguments.
> > b5472cddbe2c MAINTAINERS: remove L: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org from all but "THE REST" > > > > So it turns out that it's all but intuitive, not all people > > use scripts/get_maintainer.pl to extract maintainer contact info, > > some people read the MAINTAINERS file and see the lack of 'L:' entries > > of various lkml-only subsystems and are sending patches to the > > maintainers only, without Cc:-ing lkml. They arguably have a point. > > shrug, I think it would be better if people > used get_maintainer more often.
People are people, they'll use well constructed human-readable sources of information like the MAINTAINERS file just fine.
> MAINTAINERS already says:
That's irrelevant really, reality tells us that good people are looking at the entries and are using them as-is. For such things technology should adapt to people, not the other way around.
> > diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS > [] > > @@ -4655,6 +4657,7 @@ F: net/irda/ > > IRQ SUBSYSTEM > > M: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> > > S: Maintained > > +L: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > If this is done, can you please standardize on > placing the L: line immediately after the M: line > and before the S: line as was done for all the > other added lines.
Good point, fixed.
Thanks,
Ingo
| |