From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (lindbergh.monkeyblade.net [23.128.96.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 25BD4198 for ; Sat, 29 Jul 2023 00:22:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0013.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.13]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 616602680; Fri, 28 Jul 2023 17:22:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from omf10.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay02.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B12312061F; Sat, 29 Jul 2023 00:22:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [HIDDEN] (Authenticated sender: joe@perches.com) by omf10.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 9739432; Sat, 29 Jul 2023 00:22:37 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] scripts: get_maintainer: steer people away from using file paths From: Joe Perches To: Konstantin Ryabitsev , Andrew Lunn Cc: Jakub Kicinski , Linus Torvalds , Krzysztof Kozlowski , geert@linux-m68k.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, workflows@vger.kernel.org, mario.limonciello@amd.com Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2023 17:22:36 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20230728-egotism-icing-3d0bd0@meerkat> References: <20230726130318.099f96fc@kernel.org> <20230726133648.54277d76@kernel.org> <20230726145721.52a20cb7@kernel.org> <20230726-june-mocha-ad6809@meerkat> <20230726171123.0d573f7c@kernel.org> <20230726-armless-ungodly-a3242f@meerkat> <1b96e465-0922-4c02-b770-4b1f27bebeb8@lunn.ch> <20230728-egotism-icing-3d0bd0@meerkat> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Evolution 3.48.4 (3.48.4-1.fc38) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 9739432 X-Stat-Signature: 7gkuanj5xoc7qcjfcfz36obxgeao5xs4 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_SPF_HELO, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_NONE,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Rspamd-Server: rspamout01 X-Session-Marker: 6A6F6540706572636865732E636F6D X-Session-ID: U2FsdGVkX1/mOlvdfqFchiId5QJNtKS3kzhjO8vsu4s= X-HE-Tag: 1690590157-822710 X-HE-Meta: U2FsdGVkX1+FNPSwB11j+R1wv5Pxe7vaiubW5Wi1tA+AoCaaqbhADgPa2JldVgvi5mt27T8OmwOyKQxChZuxVniWz70LwwPoYgW26IU9AbNFvBrSIh4SlJBrqRhFksqSA3bOCkUMWppnpofJV7wsu8AHEmyvRtyc9jLQWnZkbBfHiHihBeyh8XvyAlG/Ir6eSWq0Ohs+VstIxoVmS7OPIfvMQxSMbzCRM71dnHHqbmISNhdjpTLUK5ztQeQyr64Pxdq8q0X9tNDSs+MsiwPDl74QyrF71UABKIeckzzZhGqXfsKbqfP7Uiy41EVDg1VnDULDt4fiB2MVPenvPk78HSflzxegK8s736AuJOdUBchWDnYWqk83m01FrWt9wJSM X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on lindbergh.monkeyblade.net On Fri, 2023-07-28 at 16:29 -0400, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote: > On Thu, Jul 27, 2023 at 01:00:15PM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote: > > > Think as if instead of being Cc'd on patches, they got Bcc'd on them. > >=20 > > And how does reply work? I assume it would only go to those in To: or > > Cc: ? Is there enough context in the headers in a reply for the system > > to figure out who to Bcc: the reply to? >=20 > I have actually solved a similar problem already as part of a different > project (bugbot). We associate a set of additional addresses with a threa= d and > can send any thread updates to those addresses. >=20 > It would require a bit more effort to adapt it so we properly handle boun= ces, > but effectively this does what you're asking about -- replies sent to a t= hread > will be sent out to all addresses we've associated with that thread (via > get_maintainer.pl). In a sense, this will create a miniature pseudo-maili= ng > list per each thread with its own set of subscribers. >=20 > I just need to make sure this doesn't fall over once we are hitting > LKML-levels of activity. >=20 How about whenever a single mailing list like linux-patches@vger.kernel.org gets new 0/n without an in-reply-to header and m/n patches with only the single in-reply-to header of an 0/n patch or simply a single patch without an in-reply-to header, the cc list is automatically generated from a tool like get_maintainer and a From: line is added if necessary to the message body and the email forwarded to all cc's and linux-patches is removed from the email? I believe that would help solve most correctness of recipient list issues and then the linux-patches list would not need further involvement.