Re: [PATCH 00/17] MAINTAINERS: Add drivers/staging entries

[Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>]

On Wed, Jun 09, 2010 at 08:52:24AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-06-09 at 08:08 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 09, 2010 at 03:24:51PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > On Wednesday 09 June 2010, Greg KH wrote:
> > > > > > I also found it a bit odd you didn't send these to the stable subsystem
> > > > > > maintainer, why?
> > > > > The MAINTAINERS patches are forward going, not historical.
> > > > What does that mean?
> > > I guess you meant to write '... to the /staging/ subsystem maintainer'.
> > Doh, yes, you are right.
> > Joe, why didn't you send these to the "STAGING" subsystem maintainer?
> 
> Gee, who would that be?  Why be so indirect?
> (Even though you are both the stable and the staging maintainer)
> 
> Why don't you just write "How come I didn't get cc'd?"

Because I was trying to point out that you are ignoring the maintainer
of the subsystem for which you are adding entries for.  In fact, going
against the wishes of that maintainer (i.e. me) at the same time.

> I'm the closest thing there is to a MAINTAINERS maintainer.
> Andrew has taken all the patches I've posted to it except for
> the patchset that added file patterns and you're rarely a
> path to get things into MAINTAINERS.

That's great and wonderful, and you do a great job.  But that has little
to do with this.

> And you already had written that you wouldn't take a
> similar individual patch.
> 
> http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/6/2/428

Exactly.  For the reasons stated previously.

If you are going to be responsible for keeping these up to date,
especially when the drivers go away or move, then fine, make these
changes.

But if not, then don't accept them, as I'm not going to.

greg k-h