Re: [PATCH] [1/2many] - FInd the maintainer(s) for a patch - scripts/get_maintainer.pl

Rene Herman
2007-08-14T02:09:07Z

On 08/14/2007 03:51 AM, Rene Herman wrote:

> MODULE_MAINTAINER() was discussed a while ago but embedding information
> into the binary has the problem you can't ever change deployed systems,
> meaning it lags by design. If a maintainer changes, people would still
> be using the information from their old binaries, meaning a replaced
> maintainer might get contacted for potentially years still (and the new
> one not).
>
> (you could avoid that by placing not a name/address in the maintainer
> tag but a pointer to somewhere else but at that point this gets to be
> about solving something else).
>
> Keeping it in the source alone is fine. C files could just embed their
> MAINTAINERS entry as a header:
>
> /*
> * P: Maintainer
> * M: Mail patches to
> * L: Mailing list that is relevant to this area
> * W: Web-page with status/info
> * T: SCM tree type and location. Type is one of: git, hg, quilt.
> * S: Status, one of the following:
> */
>
> And probably adding fields:
>
> * I: Info/Summary (for index files and the like)
> * A: Author
> * G: License
>
> and such. Yes, while we're at it, we can pick better letters or full
> word tags ;-)

Okay, and if a single "maintenance unit" consists of many files, this gets
to be too much yes. But they _could_ just grow a header pointing back to the
MINTAINERS file/database;

/*
* MAINTAINERS: 3C359 NETWORK DRIVER
*/

Thst should keep things minimal enough to keep them updated, no?

Rene.