Re: [PATCH 16/18] MAINTAINERS - Remove L:

[Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org>]

On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 11:00:22PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 27 May 2009 14:50:06 +0900 Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 10:38:38PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2009-05-27 at 10:33 +0900, Paul Mundt wrote:
> > > > On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 10:51:24PM -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
> > > > > Do subsystem maintainers think so?  Unless they do (and tell others
> > > > > so), I don't think it will actually happen.  Until that point, I don't
> > > > > think the L:linux-kernel lines should be removed.
> > > > > 
> > > > Ultimately it should come to common sense. If you are only touching
> > > > subsystem or architecture-specific code and it's unlikely anyone on l-k
> > > > is going to care, or have much to add to it, then there really isn't a
> > > > lot of point in mindlessly Cc-ing the list on every change.
> > > 
> > > And if you already know who or to what list you
> > > want to submit a patch to, the MAINTAINERS entry
> > > doesn't much matter.
> > > 
> > That's not true. If I have to hack something up in some random subsystem
> > then I will often have to hunt for both the list address (if there is one
> > at all!), as well as the folks looking after that code. Yes, I could
> > blindly send it to a given list, but it's much more likely to fall
> > through than sending it directly to the people who care.
> > 
> > MAINTAINERS is very useful for randomly looking up people and email
> > addresses, especially if they aren't people you routinely interact with.
> > It's also much faster to look through than remembering the proper
> > incantation for a specific perl script ;-)
> > 
> > Knowing where to look and knowing who to talk to are two different
> > things. Most subsystem maintainers only interact with a small group of
> > other subsystem maintainers on any sort of regular basis, while things
> > like build errors in -next often send you scurrying one way or the other.
> 
> Most subsystem maintainers shed patches like a hobo does dandruff.  If
> it is cc'ed to lkml then there is a decent chance that I will see it
> and will un-lose it.
> 
> This happens probably 100 or more times per kernel release.

Clearly all of the subsystems that matter are using patchwork ;-)