From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
To: Chris Snook <csnook@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: RFHelp: Splitting MAINTAINERS into maintainers/* and Makefile/Kconfig support
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 05:30:41 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1187353841.822.60.camel@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <46C53F3F.5060108@redhat.com>
On Fri, 2007-08-17 at 02:25 -0400, Chris Snook wrote:
> The whole point of MAINTAINERS is to have one central repository for this
> information, instead of scattering it throughout the various source files. If
> that file is getting too unwieldy (and I don't think it is) then I could
> understand splitting it up hierarchically, for example having a
> drivers/net/MAINTAINERS that listed the info for all the net drivers.
The individual MAINTAINERS files eliminates what Linus
described as their "hotness".
No shared updates by multiple parties.
> What you're suggesting is a less efficient equivalent to putting the info
> directly into the source files.
I believe that wrong.
Maintainer patterns frequently look like:
F: arch/i386/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/
F: drivers/cpufreq/
F: include/linux/cpufreq.h
If in source, this would currently require 21 + 12 + 1
modifications instead of 1.
> If that approach was enough to make people
> happy, we wouldn't have MAINTAINERS to begin with.
I think the insertion of maintainers into source
itself is wrong. It's freeform, error prone and
requires significant modifications to source files
as maintainers come and go.
> Perhaps with a little automation it could be revived,
Which is the help I'm looking for.
Can someone please help here on ideas or implementation
adding a makefile target for MAINTAINERS from files
in a specific subdirectory?
> though I think that adding a path pattern
> removes the need, while keeping it easier to parse by scripts.
> I appreciate the effort to make MAINTAINERS more useful,
> but please don't add another 600 files to the tree.
In the distributed form, you'll still end up with
~400 new files spread all over the tree.
Either way, you'll have hundreds of files.
$ grep "^F:" MAINTAINERS | sed -e "s/[A-Za-z0-9\_\*\.\-]*$//" | sort |
uniq | wc -l
415
Centralized as maintainers/* or distributed as ../../../Maintainers
Pick one, I don't much care, but I'm still looking for
Makefile/KConfig help reassembling it into a single
MAINTAINERS block similar to the current form.
Help?
cheers, Joe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-08-17 12:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-08-16 20:51 RFHelp: Splitting MAINTAINERS into maintainers/* and Makefile/Kconfig support Joe Perches
2007-08-17 6:25 ` Chris Snook
2007-08-17 12:30 ` Joe Perches [this message]
2007-08-17 14:48 ` Sam Ravnborg
2007-08-17 15:13 ` Joe Perches
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1187353841.822.60.camel@localhost \
--to=joe@perches.com \
--cc=csnook@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox