From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Joe Perches Subject: Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: correct entry for LVM Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2016 16:03:45 -0700 Message-ID: <1460415825.1800.100.camel@perches.com> References: <1460388039-20282-1-git-send-email-sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com> <20160411155147.GB9288@agk-dp.fab.redhat.com> <570BCD85.6090807@gmail.com> <20160411162306.GC9288@agk-dp.fab.redhat.com> <570BD354.2000100@gmail.com> <570BF1DB.1040700@youngman.org.uk> <1460408934.1800.87.camel@perches.com> <570C2468.7050608@youngman.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <570C2468.7050608@youngman.org.uk> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Wols Lists , Sudip Mukherjee , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Alasdair Kergon , Mike Snitzer , Shaohua Li , dm-devel@redhat.com, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: dm-devel.ids 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 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