public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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


  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