From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751762AbdG1DMR (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Jul 2017 23:12:17 -0400 Received: from smtprelay0204.hostedemail.com ([216.40.44.204]:52158 "EHLO smtprelay.hostedemail.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751743AbdG1DMP (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Jul 2017 23:12:15 -0400 X-Session-Marker: 6A6F6540706572636865732E636F6D X-Spam-Summary: 2,0,0,,d41d8cd98f00b204,joe@perches.com,:::::::,RULES_HIT:41:355:379:541:560:599:800:960:968:973:988:989:1260:1277:1311:1313:1314:1345:1359:1373:1434:1437:1515:1516:1518:1534:1541:1593:1594:1711:1730:1747:1777:1792:2198:2199:2393:2553:2559:2562:2731:2828:2895:3138:3139:3140:3141:3142:3352:3622:3865:3866:3867:3868:3870:3871:3872:3873:3874:4321:5007:7903:9010:10004:10400:10848:11232:11658:11914:12050:12296:12663:12740:12760:12895:13018:13019:13069:13161:13229:13311:13357:13439:13618:14096:14097:14181:14659:14721:21080:21450:21451:21627:30025:30054:30070:30090:30091,0,RBL:none,CacheIP:none,Bayesian:0.5,0.5,0.5,Netcheck:none,DomainCache:0,MSF:not bulk,SPF:,MSBL:0,DNSBL:none,Custom_rules:0:0:0,LFtime:2,LUA_SUMMARY:none X-HE-Tag: trade56_4dae3236ba147 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 2236 Message-ID: <1501211532.5368.42.camel@perches.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH Y.A. RESEND] MAINTAINERS: fix alpha. ordering From: Joe Perches To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Randy Dunlap , LKML , Andrew Morton Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2017 20:12:12 -0700 In-Reply-To: References: <1501201807.5368.31.camel@perches.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.22.6-1ubuntu1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2017-07-27 at 19:43 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 5:30 PM, Joe Perches wrote: > > > > Maybe add a reordering of the patterns so that each pattern list > > is in a specific order too > > I don't think this is wrong per se, but I'm not sure I want to get > into the merge hell any more than we are already. > > Maybe when/if that file is actually split up? Fine by me. The get_maintainer patch is a prereq to any split-up. There are a bunch of little niggly patches that should go in that remove/update bad F: patterns too one day. Given the differences between -next and your tree, I think only Andrew and quilt would do a decent job of getting individual patches merged. Unless you want to take them. I think it's better to centralize the MAINTAINERS location in /MAINTAINERS/ than spread them all over the tree given how many subsystems and maintainerships are also spread around the tree. But the get_maintainers patch I sent allows both styles.