From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 429F8CCF9F8 for ; Wed, 5 Nov 2025 06:02:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1vGWb5-0006hp-WE; Wed, 05 Nov 2025 01:02:20 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1vGWb3-0006hS-RT for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 05 Nov 2025 01:02:17 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.129.124]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1vGWb1-0007Vi-LY for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 05 Nov 2025 01:02:17 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1762322533; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=kKauCUJzYVtBm7uuGDn1t5g4punLzkr3Dsj4cxV28hw=; b=iuqPRc2lnryddFVWW7o6R9qC6J63JKWyklFuUsBigJnqaxOtEvLKaD0UwHhHzWOnkWqnRW s3NlfrpTpLQjJxJkY3HfBxcpyuDqXngaF84ePk3yCpsKI5F2yQmv5hjiEfwHf7vepMMzPx DBKG36AmmhDWuC9M7nYG3LWL1CilA9U= Received: from mx-prod-mc-06.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (ec2-35-165-154-97.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [35.165.154.97]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-13-j9FuNuQwOx2BRgwelb2DLw-1; Wed, 05 Nov 2025 01:02:12 -0500 X-MC-Unique: j9FuNuQwOx2BRgwelb2DLw-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: j9FuNuQwOx2BRgwelb2DLw_1762322531 Received: from mx-prod-int-01.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (mx-prod-int-01.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com [10.30.177.4]) (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 mx-prod-mc-06.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6000B180049F; Wed, 5 Nov 2025 06:02:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from blackfin.pond.sub.org (unknown [10.45.242.18]) by mx-prod-int-01.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E4DF43000198; Wed, 5 Nov 2025 06:02:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: by blackfin.pond.sub.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 2DBB521E6A27; Wed, 05 Nov 2025 07:02:08 +0100 (CET) From: Markus Armbruster To: Peter Maydell Cc: QEMU Developers Subject: Re: MAINTAINERS spring-cleaning In-Reply-To: (Peter Maydell's message of "Tue, 4 Nov 2025 17:36:47 +0000") References: Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2025 07:02:07 +0100 Message-ID: <87ikfpow4g.fsf@pond.sub.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.4.1 on 10.30.177.4 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=170.10.129.124; envelope-from=armbru@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -28 X-Spam_score: -2.9 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.788, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Peter Maydell writes: > I just did some analysis of our MAINTAINERS file with the aid of a > local copy of the public-inbox archive of qemu-devel, and (unless my > scripting is broken ;-)) of the 258 emails listed in MAINTAINERS, > 50 have not sent an email to qemu-devel in the last three years. > > Some of that will be things like "the address somebody uses to send > to the list is not quite the same as the one they have listed", so > it will need some manual checking, but I think this shows we could > use a bit of spring-cleaning of the file to remove stale entries. > > I propose to send some (not cc'd the list) emails to these people, > asking (politely!) if they're still interested in being in the > MAINTAINERS file, and treating "email bounces", "no" and "no reply > within a month" as "I'm no longer interested in being cc'd on patches". > Then we can update the file accordingly. > > (This was prompted by a series I sent out earlier today getting > a load of "address unknown" bounce-mails from a corporate server; > that's not a particularly rare thing to happen IME. And I also > have developed a habit of manually curating cc lists to drop > people I suspect of not actually being involved any more...) Yes, please! We talked about the issue of stale MAINTAINERS entries before, mostly when e-mail bounces get sufficiently annoying for somebody to submit or ask for a MAINTAINERS correction, but as far as I know it always stopped at talk. Ignored e-mail is arguably worse than bouncing e-mail. 50 entries out of 258 is a lot. If the cleaning you propose works, we should consider repeating it regularly, to avoid backsliding. Annually?