From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Don Slutz Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add scripts/get_maintainer.pl Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2013 11:55:26 -0400 Message-ID: <525C13EE.5070007@terremark.com> References: <1380752562-24760-1-git-send-email-dslutz@verizon.com> <524EA7F702000078000F8CC3@nat28.tlf.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <524EA7F702000078000F8CC3@nat28.tlf.novell.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Jan Beulich , Matthew Daley , Don Slutz Cc: Keir Fraser , "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org How about this change: From 43bd190b25e2c02d0323c9843b99aa4592b9a13c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Don Slutz Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2013 11:48:10 -0400 Subject: [PATCH 2/2] get_maintainer.pl: Drop 'supporter:THE REST' if any other supporter found. Signed-off-by: Don Slutz --- scripts/get_maintainer.pl | 12 ++++++++++++ 1 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/scripts/get_maintainer.pl b/scripts/get_maintainer.pl index 44e2532..8a44bf7 100755 --- a/scripts/get_maintainer.pl +++ b/scripts/get_maintainer.pl @@ -647,6 +647,18 @@ sub get_maintainers { } } + if ($#email_to > 0) { + my $do_shift = 0; + foreach my $email (@email_to) { + if ($email->[1] ne 'supporter:THE REST') { + $do_shift = 1; + last; + } + } + shift @email_to + if $do_shift; + } + foreach my $email (@email_to, @list_to) { $email->[0] = deduplicate_email($email->[0]); } -- 1.7.1 which makes the script more intelligent. -Don Slutz On 10/04/13 05:35, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 04.10.13 at 08:03, Matthew Daley wrote: >> Also, speaking of adequate MAINTAINERS coverage, the last entry which >> attempts to have Keir as a fallback for "everything else" actually >> mean Keir is CC'd on everything using the script. This is because it >> uses all matching regexes and not just the most specific. Perhaps this >> entry needs to be commented out (leaving it their for manual >> inspection), or removed entirely? > Or the script be made more intelligent? After all, the entry is there > for a reason... > > Jan >