Re: Maintainers master list?

["Eric S. Raymond" <esr@thyrsus.com>]

Rik van Riel <riel@conectiva.com.br>:
> Look, when somebody stops maintaining something, they'll
> stop sending patches. When this happens it's only natural
> that the information you want to use to generate the
> MAINTAINERS file is also out of date.

True.  Distributed metadata won't solve this problem.  It won't make the
problem any worse, either, so it's a wash on this issue.
 
> I fail to see how your idea would solve anything.

What happens now when somebody takes over responsibility for a file
or subsystem and the MAINTAINERS file doesn't get patched, either because
that person forgets to send a MAINTAINERS update or Linus doesn't 
happen to take the MAINTAINERS patch for a while?

What happens when I look at a file and it's not obvious which
subsystem it belongs to?  Sure, I can grovel through MAINTAINERS.  But
how do I know which verbal description matches the function of the
cryptically-commented or uncommented code I have in front of me?

Distributed-information problems need distributed-information
solutions.  Locality is your friend.  This crowd should know that
if anybody should.
-- 
		<a href="http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/">Eric S. Raymond</a>

A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion,
butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance
accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give
orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem,
pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently,
die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
	-- Robert A. Heinlein, "Time Enough for Love"