From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965993AbdGTWuH (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Jul 2017 18:50:07 -0400 Received: from smtprelay0130.hostedemail.com ([216.40.44.130]:36821 "EHLO smtprelay.hostedemail.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965273AbdGTWuG (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Jul 2017 18:50:06 -0400 X-Session-Marker: 6A6F6540706572636865732E636F6D X-Spam-Summary: 2,0,0,,d41d8cd98f00b204,joe@perches.com,:::::::::,RULES_HIT:41:355:379:541:560:599:800:960:973:988:989:1260:1277:1311:1313:1314:1345:1359:1373:1437:1515:1516:1518:1534:1539:1593:1594:1711:1730:1747:1777:1792:2393:2553:2559:2562:2828:3138:3139:3140:3141:3142:3352:3622:3865:3866:3867:3870:3872:4321:5007:6660:6668:10004:10400:10848:11232:11658:11914:12740:12760:12895:13069:13311:13357:13439:14181:14659:14721:21080:21627:30025:30054:30084:30090:30091,0,RBL:none,CacheIP:none,Bayesian:0.5,0.5,0.5,Netcheck:none,DomainCache:0,MSF:not bulk,SPF:,MSBL:0,DNSBL:none,Custom_rules:0:0:0,LFtime:2,LUA_SUMMARY:none X-HE-Tag: robin65_95c21dda239 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 2009 Message-ID: <1500591002.14415.17.camel@perches.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND v4] MAINTAINERS: fix lots of alphabetic ordering From: Joe Perches To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Michael Ellerman , Andrew Morton , Randy Dunlap , LKML Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 15:50:02 -0700 In-Reply-To: References: <20170719144457.8b1b6556fc7883ac7bc2b2b0@linux-foundation.org> <1500512701.25934.47.camel@perches.com> <1500525809.14415.3.camel@perches.com> <87tw27gyzp.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au> <1500569295.14415.14.camel@perches.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.22.6-1ubuntu1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2017-07-20 at 11:03 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 9:48 AM, Joe Perches wrote: > > > > Same general concept, but then an expectation would be > > relative paths for filename patterns. > > No, I actually think we really should require the filename patterns to > be absolute, even if the MAINTAINERS file might be deep in the > hierarchy. So do I but I bet dollars to doughnuts it happens because expectations are what people assume so use too. > So file patterns absolutely would need to remain relative to the top > of the repository, not to the location of the MAINTAINERS file. yup.