On Thu, 2023-09-28 at 14:03 +0900, Justin Stitt wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 1:46 PM Joe Perches <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 2023-09-28 at 04:23 +0000, Justin Stitt wrote:
> > > Add the "D:" type which behaves the same as "K:" but will only match
> > > content present in a patch file.
[]
> > > My opinion: Nack.
> >
> > I think something like this would be better
> > as it avoids duplication of K and D content.
>
> If I understand correctly, this puts the onus on the get_maintainer users
> to select the right argument whereas adding "D:", albeit with some
> duplicate code, allows maintainers themselves to decide in exactly
> which context they receive mail.
Maybe, but I doubt it'll be significantly different.
> This could all be a moot point, though, as I believe Konstantin
> is trying to separate out the whole idea of a patch-sender needing
> to specify the recipients of a patch.
As I understand it, by using get_maintainer.
On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 10:08:33PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > This could all be a moot point, though, as I believe Konstantin
> > is trying to separate out the whole idea of a patch-sender needing
> > to specify the recipients of a patch.
>
> As I understand it, by using get_maintainer.
Correct, we will ultimately still defer to get_maintainer to figure out who
needs to be added.
-K