[PATCH RESEND v4 0/2] Fixup instructions around mailing recipients

[PATCH RESEND v4 0/2] Fixup instructions around mailing recipients

[Bryan O'Donoghue]

RESEND
+ Akira

V4:
- Change the subject line of the series
  Previous: Expand get_maintainer to be explicit about supporters
  https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220930064629.329514-1-bryan.odonoghue@linaro.org/t/

- Update get_maintainer.pl to return "maintainer" for both "S: Supported"
  and "S: Maintained" - Theodore Tso
  For the purposes of sending a patch whether or not the maintainer is
  listed as volunteer or paid is not really useful information.
  Listing both as "maintainer" is clearer the end user.

- Incorporate Krzysztof's list of recipients into
  Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst.

- I didn't include the get_mainainter.pl example.
  Comments from both Akira and Joe suggest to me the example is not that
  useful.

- get_maintainer will no longer produce "supporter" so one could argue that
  the documentation shouldn't refer to supporters however not all of the
  potential output strings are documented and I've opted not to document
  "chief penguin" either.

  I'd like to focus on the particular case of supporters with some
  reasonable knock-on documentation tweaks for the obvious gaps we've
  identified in our discussion because "supporter" really means
  "maintainer" and you absolutely have to mail that person to get your
  patch into the right inbox.

V3:

- Drops change to get_maintainer.pl - Theodore
- Rewords around `get_maintainer --nogit-fallback` and gives an example

I think the document text now is clearer and should be more helpful to
others in getting their minimum submission list right every time.

V2:

https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220928003006.230103-1-bryan.odonoghue@linaro.org/T/#u

- Documentation/process
  Added in text to also make clear subsystem mailing list should be
  included - Krzysztof

- Changed get_maintainer.pl to print maintainer[supporter] or
  maintainer[volunteer] depending on MAINTAINERS file. - Thorsten/Bryan

- Choose supporter and volunteer instead of supported and volunteer
  Supporter and volunteer describe the role of the person whereas supported
  and volunteer would describe an activity and a role which isn't
  consistent. - Thorsten/Bryan

- I didn't change Documentation/process/5.Posting.rst
  This file doesn't mention get_maintainer.pl and I was mostly aiming to
  fixup the process around get_maintainer.pl. - Thorsten

- Myself and Thorsten discussed changing get_maintainer.pl, how it seems
  like a desirable thing to do but also that "it might break scripts for
  people" and it might.

  I don't know if get_maintainer.pl is or should be considered to be a
  stable interface and an explicit software contract but, making it clear a
  supporter is also a maintainer seems like the right thing to do from a
  transmission of information perspective.

  There is still the option of just updating Documentation/process in
  isolation.

V1:
- Sent a standalone change to Documentation/process stating
  get_maintainer.pl email addresses marked "supporter" should be included
  in a patch run.

Bryan O'Donoghue (2):
  get_maintainer: Print maintainer for S: Supported
  Documentation/process: Be more explicit about who to mail on patch
    submission

 Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst | 4 +++-
 scripts/get_maintainer.pl                    | 2 +-
 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

-- 
2.37.3

[PATCH RESEND v4 1/2] get_maintainer: Print maintainer for S: Supported

[Bryan O'Donoghue]

Throughout the documentation we make reference to maintainers as the people
who ought to be mailed when sending patches.

Right now get_maintainer.pl returns "supporter" for maintained files which
are denoted "S: Supported".

Update get_maintainer to output "maintainer" for "S: Supported" the
differentiation between paid (v) non-paid maintainers doesn't impact who
needs to be mailed for patch submissions.

Signed-off-by: Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@linaro.org>
---
 scripts/get_maintainer.pl | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/scripts/get_maintainer.pl b/scripts/get_maintainer.pl
index ab123b498fd9b..7a8d2961d948d 100755
--- a/scripts/get_maintainer.pl
+++ b/scripts/get_maintainer.pl
@@ -1283,7 +1283,7 @@ sub get_maintainer_role {
 
     $role = lc($role);
     if      ($role eq "supported") {
-	$role = "supporter";
+	$role = "maintainer";
     } elsif ($role eq "maintained") {
 	$role = "maintainer";
     } elsif ($role eq "odd fixes") {
-- 
2.37.3

[PATCH RESEND v4 2/2] Documentation/process: Be more explicit about who to mail on patch submission

[Bryan O'Donoghue]

Recently when submitting a yaml change I found that I had omitted the
maintainer whose tree the change needed to go through.

The reason for that is the path in MAINTAINERS is marked as Supported not
Maintained. Reading MAINTAINERS we see quote:

           Supported:   Someone is actually paid to look after this.
           Maintained:  Someone actually looks after it.

The current submitting-patches.rst only says to mail maintainers though not
supporters. Discussing further on the list the suggestion was made to state
that the following are the right addresses to mail:

- Maintainers
- Supporters
- Reviewers
- Dedicated lists
- LKML as a fallback when there is no dedicated list

Add in a two sentences to capture that statement.

Signed-off-by: Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@linaro.org>
---
 Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst | 7 +++++--
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst b/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
index be49d8f2601b4..90fda3367a405 100644
--- a/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
+++ b/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
@@ -227,8 +227,11 @@ You should always copy the appropriate subsystem maintainer(s) on any patch
 to code that they maintain; look through the MAINTAINERS file and the
 source code revision history to see who those maintainers are.  The
 script scripts/get_maintainer.pl can be very useful at this step (pass paths to
-your patches as arguments to scripts/get_maintainer.pl).  If you cannot find a
-maintainer for the subsystem you are working on, Andrew Morton
+your patches as arguments to scripts/get_maintainer.pl).  In the output of
+get_maintainer.pl the recommendation is to mail every maintainer, supporter,
+reviewer and dedicated mailing list. If get_maintainer doesn't indicate a
+dedicated mailing list linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org should be included. If you
+cannot find a maintainer for the subsystem you are working on, Andrew Morton
 (akpm@linux-foundation.org) serves as a maintainer of last resort.
 
 You should also normally choose at least one mailing list to receive a copy
-- 
2.37.3

Re: [PATCH RESEND v4 1/2] get_maintainer: Print maintainer for S: Supported

[Joe Perches]

On Mon, 2022-10-03 at 17:24 +0100, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote:
> Throughout the documentation we make reference to maintainers as the people
> who ought to be mailed when sending patches.
> 
> Right now get_maintainer.pl returns "supporter" for maintained files which
> are denoted "S: Supported".

As it should.

I think this patch is misguided and do not agree with the concept.

Either do away with the concept of S: Supported or use it.

As is, it merely hides the actual content of the MAINTAINERS file.

A reader of the MAINTAINERS file would still see the actual value.
Using other options of get_maintainer.pl like --sections would show
the actual content.

Other options would still show S:
> 
> Update get_maintainer to output "maintainer" for "S: Supported" the
> differentiation between paid (v) non-paid maintainers doesn't impact who
> needs to be mailed for patch submissions.
[]
> diff --git a/scripts/get_maintainer.pl b/scripts/get_maintainer.pl
[]
> @@ -1283,7 +1283,7 @@ sub get_maintainer_role {
>  
>      $role = lc($role);
>      if      ($role eq "supported") {
> -	$role = "supporter";
> +	$role = "maintainer";
>      } elsif ($role eq "maintained") {
>  	$role = "maintainer";
>      } elsif ($role eq "odd fixes") {

Re: [PATCH RESEND v4 1/2] get_maintainer: Print maintainer for S: Supported

[Bryan O'Donoghue]

On 04/10/2022 09:02, Joe Perches wrote:
> As it should.
> 
> I think this patch is misguided and do not agree with the concept.
> 
> Either do away with the concept of S: Supported or use it.

Sure, I can simply resend as V5 minus this patch, since the 
documentation change calls out "supporter" - which is FWIW what the 
original proposed patch did, albeit with different wording.

---
bod