From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760368AbZE0GD1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 May 2009 02:03:27 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1760157AbZE0GDR (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 May 2009 02:03:17 -0400 Received: from 124x34x33x190.ap124.ftth.ucom.ne.jp ([124.34.33.190]:58295 "EHLO master.linux-sh.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1760106AbZE0GDQ (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 May 2009 02:03:16 -0400 Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 15:02:57 +0900 From: Paul Mundt To: Andrew Morton Cc: Joe Perches , Grant Likely , Linus Torvalds , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 16/18] MAINTAINERS - Remove L: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org from all but "THE REST" Message-ID: <20090527060257.GA11029@linux-sh.org> Mail-Followup-To: Paul Mundt , Andrew Morton , Joe Perches , Grant Likely , Linus Torvalds , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <9f55522f7ab56afcf16d936d06ab2f3a7e699ed5.1243131992.git.joe@perches.com> <1243135358.3560.1.camel@Joe-Laptop.home> <1243139947.3560.7.camel@Joe-Laptop.home> <20090527013303.GB8979@linux-sh.org> <1243402718.27337.8.camel@Joe-Laptop.home> <20090527055005.GA9802@linux-sh.org> <20090526230022.015b579d.akpm@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090526230022.015b579d.akpm@linux-foundation.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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 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 ;-)