Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: correct entry for LVM

[Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>]

On Mon, 2016-04-11 at 23:25 +0100, Wols Lists wrote:
> On 11/04/16 22:08, Joe Perches wrote:
> > 
> > I'm a native English speaker and I think that's a not
> > a good argument.
> > 
> > Having the same entry for M: and L: where M: isn't an
> > actual person is not a great idea.
> > 
> > The list is not a maintainer.
> > 
> > 
> Depends on your definition of maintainer ...
> 
> To me, it means "should be notified of anything maintenance-related".

I think that's not a particularly good definition.
MAINTAINERS describes the M: entry as:

	M: Mail patches to: FullName <address@domain>

That _person_ is generally responsible for vetting patches
and bug fixing.

> By that definition the list is a maintainer.

Not given there's a specific L: entry that's described

	L: Mailing list that is relevant to this area

> And what do you do if you
> don't have a person designated as maintainer?

Then you don't have a maintainer

>  Do you send everything to /dev/null?

Patches are sent to lkml.

> A list is for general discussion, advice, whatever. Those two
> definitions are not mutually exclusive, and therefore the list email
> address may need to be identified as both/and, hence the two entries.

disagree.

cheers, Joe