Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 21 Apr 2001 15:09:43 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 21 Apr 2001 15:09:34 -0400 Received: from duba06h06-0.dplanet.ch ([212.35.36.67]:49163 "EHLO duba06h06-0.dplanet.ch") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 21 Apr 2001 15:09:21 -0400 Message-ID: <3AE1E77C.AF1402F4@dplanet.ch> Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 22:03:08 +0200 From: "Giacomo A. Catenazzi" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.1 i586) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: esr@thyrsus.com CC: CML2 , kbuild-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [kbuild-devel] Request for comment -- a better attribution system In-Reply-To: <20010421114942.A26415@thyrsus.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org "Eric S. Raymond" wrote: > > This is a proposal for an attribution metadata system in the Linux kernel > sources. The goal of the system is to make it easy for people reading > any given piece of code to identify the responsible maintainer. The motivation > for this proposal is that the present system, a single top-level MAINTAINERS > file, doesn't seem to be scaling well. > > In this system, most files will contain a "map block". A map block is a > metadata section embedded in a comment near the beginning of the file. > Here is an example map block for my kxref.py tool: > Good! > And here's what a map block should look like in general: > > %Map: > T: Description of this unit for map purposes > P: Person > M: Mail patches to > L: Mailing list that is relevant to this area > W: Web-page with status/info > C: Controlling configuration symbol > D: Date this meta-info was last updated > S: Status, one of the following: > There may be more than one P: field per map block. There should be exactly one > M: field. > > The D: field may have the special value `None' meaining that this map block > was translated from old information which has not yet been confirmed with the > responsible maintainer. > > Note that this is the same set of conventions presently used in the > MAINTAINERS file, with only the T:, D:, and C: fields being new. The > contents of the C: field, if present, should be the name of the > CONFIG_ symbol that controls the inclusion of this unit in a kernel. > > (Map blocks are terminated by a blank line.) > We should use the same filed name of CREDITS e.g. D: for Description. (maybe you can invert D: description and T: time of last update) It whould nice also if we include the type of the license (GPL,...). This for a fast parsing (and maybe also to replace the few lines of license) Instead of C: it is more important (IMHO) to include the module name. Maybe we can include both (modules name are always lower case). I think that the inclusion of the config option is not important ( considering that it can be easily parsed from the kaos' new makefiles). giacomo - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/