From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rich Felker Date: Fri, 08 Jan 2016 18:51:37 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] MAINTAINERS: remove linux-sh list from non-arch/sh sections Message-Id: <20160108185137.GL238@brightrain.aerifal.cx> List-Id: References: <20160108043907.GA7005@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20160108044054.GA7130@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20160108065642.GA1215@verge.net.au> <568FF369.9080006@landley.net> In-Reply-To: <568FF369.9080006@landley.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Rob Landley Cc: Simon Horman , linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Yoshinori Sato , Geert Uytterhoeven , Andrew Morton , Peter Zijlstra , "D. Jeff Dionne" On Fri, Jan 08, 2016 at 11:35:37AM -0600, Rob Landley wrote: > On 01/08/2016 12:56 AM, Simon Horman wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 07, 2016 at 11:40:54PM -0500, Rich Felker wrote: > >> From: Rich Felker > >> > >> Recently the bulk of traffic on the linux-sh list has been unrelated > >> to arch/sh but instead focused on Renesas hardware for their ARM-based > >> SoCs. As part of resuming maintenance of arch/sh, remove the linux-sh > >> list from the MAINTAINERS file sections for these other components so > >> that new arch/sh development is not drowned out by unrelated > >> cross-postings. > > > > The use of the linux-sh mailing list has evolved somewhat over time, > > from SH related to ARM related. Its name (obviously) has not evolved. > > According to http://vger.kernel.org/vger-lists.html#linux-sh > > This is the development discussion and bug reporting mailing list > for the Linux port to the SuperH architecture. > > By "evolved" you mean "acquired a bunch of off-topic traffic because the > architecture's original owner abandoned it and moved on to other things > that already _have_ lists, but treated this list as their own personal > scratch pad". > > Those people let the architecture this list was created for become > unmaintained for a year and a half. DURING that year and a half they > posted unrelated content to the list because they think it belongs to > them personally rather than to Linux. > > Now that the architecture is becoming maintained again (on the hardware > side as well, because the patents have expired and other people are > taking an interest), we would like to reclaim this list to develop the > Linux arch/sh directory. > > This is a kernel list, not a Renesas list. > > > Dropping linux-sh@vger.kernel.org from portions of the MAINTAINERS file as > > you suggest would essentially leave the Renesas ARM work without a mailing > > list or patchwork instance. > > Here's a half-dozen arm lists already: > > http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/mailinglists/lists.php > > And that's not even a complete list of them all: > > http://vger.kernel.org/vger-lists.html#linux-tegra > > > Both of which are actively used for that work. > > Off-topic traffic exists, therefore it should exist? Its volume is its > justification? Why do we have spam filters then? > > > Off-hand I can think of three solutions to this problem: > > > > 1. Live with the noise > > 2. Establish a new list (and possibly patchwork instance) for the SH work. > > So... squatter's rights? > > Renesas calling its new arm stuff "shmobile" is as relevant as Intel > designating itanic "ia64" as the successor to "ia32". The superh > architecture's only been officially unmaintained for a year and change > (presumably because the patents were expiring so they saw no more profit > in it for themselves). > > Meanwhile there was active superh-compatible work off-list during that > time (the j-core stuff) that's just now coming to fruition, building off > 20 years of history and a decade and change of previous Linux development. I'm not here to place blame or argue over who's "fault" it is that this happened, but it is inappropriate for a kernel arch list to be used as a development list for hardware that's no longer related to the arch and just happens to be produced/used by the same company. Another decent analogy might be if the linuxppc list had been deluged with driver traffic for Apple-specific x86 hardware after Apple dropped PPC and switched to x86. As far as I know, no such thing happened, but I don't think it would have gone over well. > [...] > We aren't proposing to rename the arch/sh directory to "jcore", so > "linux-sh@vger.kernel.org" remains the logical name for this list. The > new stuff is intentionally backwards compatible with the old stuff, and > we are happy to maintain compatibility with the old stuff, and have > current plans to move it to device tree. (We just need a lot more legacy > test hardware...) Indeed. SH is a nice arch with a very long history on Linux, and I'm happy to be carrying forward its legacy. I believe doing this within the framework that's already there (and thereby preserving and improving support for the legacy hardware), rather than starting over as if it were a new arch, is the right way to go, having the list overrun with mostly-unrelated traffic is an unfortunate situation to be in, and one that I'd like to see corrected. Rich