From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from ms.lwn.net (ms.lwn.net [45.79.88.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 385BE1B6D15; Mon, 20 Jan 2025 19:54:53 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.79.88.28 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1737402895; cv=none; b=QiYL/VvRAO3+anXXs4oHz7edIgNy+hO52ugFbjSgV/F/oMBwgkGx95vh+pMMJlEnZtehLLDmcu69eH1RJak9dJJKx/QmiggwVNLPM++Q4b9TCd9ErjjgjwLSpXRHrtXhXbisThA/kyhNhN9SGehV9AFchS0/UV/aRfnYqqUa0Xk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1737402895; c=relaxed/simple; bh=T/n42TwFUvKuZ4CPgoaljIEj2y7YBidG1XpdRKQcgo8=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=npYzoVZZ4caTkTir5p0qcNbkOF9TIQaYTzIZ7pzhGqApwtk8B56jWqtSoOrsfLr3jI5KQOzZzS0g+UbP9AwEJDBbTH0m6O7jJk9Sms20qI/hrWok2kBzLb1ORakA1fmsmBsiOWvowHSpJFHruDKczcNMe4sy5VTgiswjQx7HdRY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lwn.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lwn.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lwn.net header.i=@lwn.net header.b=mh7DyEEi; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.79.88.28 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lwn.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lwn.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lwn.net header.i=@lwn.net header.b="mh7DyEEi" DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 ms.lwn.net 1E888404ED DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lwn.net; s=20201203; t=1737402893; bh=YEO9upxrwiiVzecGObhGxSvSHv4w05Wzb8DCZKiYHXs=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=mh7DyEEiWJG3u/VaHM3u17xZDauAQyrVroV3qfbnUQSKrBMHqRqaFg3IgmL9wjh1y Dh++G61V5/vMe3osxGxDnlOWiBe2UOUWoffXF3PiNe+IjGX2Rb6h68JD8E263jvAnt 1gYwRoUvQND0vV/BsQlB2AvyO6pOLZksW6v7hsRUbRQfIxNgBjli5QkM97k/1cvmEs 15vdcH2VgZWCc8nDgeyCo6xeW4/4jlI1D/pGnhc2Z/3BK/sSeOjV8FwDPpOsL3nH+e udPScqoQyFP052kFcuiXN0f4g3iOuyE7nAMkKQg1OEVZHWcmvO9vVD3FUU/ooPNG3J TzWylMrfixFkg== Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:2601:280:5e00:625::1fe]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ms.lwn.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1E888404ED; Mon, 20 Jan 2025 19:54:53 +0000 (UTC) From: Jonathan Corbet To: Carlos Bilbao , carlos.bilbao@kernel.org Cc: avadhut.naik@amd.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] mailmap, docs: Update email to carlos.bilbao@kernel.org In-Reply-To: References: <20250111161110.862131-1-carlos.bilbao@kernel.org> <87ikqiboqp.fsf@trenco.lwn.net> <6c8457ca-c43c-4d93-8493-bf4e5b22f3df@gmail.com> <87jzaqvfyt.fsf@trenco.lwn.net> Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2025 12:54:52 -0700 Message-ID: <875xm9tg4z.fsf@trenco.lwn.net> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Carlos Bilbao writes: > By records I meant mappings of older to newer emails, which in my head > is .mailmap purpose with version control. Do you think some of the > mappings as I've added them are redundant and/or problematic? My point is that this line, which is in .mailmap now (and which your patch preserves): > Carlos Bilbao ...says to map the @amd.com address to the gmail address. But this new line: > Carlos Bilbao says to map @amd.com to @kernel.org instead. At best, this is nonsensical; at worst, you may not get the full remapping of @amd.com that you seem to want. So ... why leave that line in place? Thanks, jon