Re: [PATCH] [443/2many] MAINTAINERS - HIBERNATION (aka Software Suspend, aka swsusp):

[Rene Herman <rene.herman@gmail.com>]

On 08/14/2007 08:15 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> Quite frankly, I think the MAINTAINERS file gets a whole lot uglier this 
> way.
> 
> There's also a rather fundamental issue: this will likely make people 
> touch the MAINTAINERS file *more*, and from a maintenance standpoint, that 
> is exactly the wrong thing to have (one central file that everybody 
> touches). It just tends to generate unnecessary merge conflicts etc. 
> 
> (We used to have that issue with the central configuration file, for 
> example).
> 
> So the more I look at these things, the more convinced I am that this is 
> not the right thing to do. These things should *not* be in one huge file, 
> and I'd much much rather have the maintainership information be carried 
> along with the subsystem itself, or the files it contains.
> 
> In other words, it would be much better to just have per-file markers, 
> along with some per-subdirectory stuff or similar.

Joe just now convinced me that rather than the per-file markers, the marker 
is meta-information that could just be stored in GIT, with the MAINTAINERS 
file turning into something generated.

git info --maintainer and such (for many possible kinds of --flags) would 
throw out the information.

Rene.