Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <156821692280.2951081.18036584954940423225.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com>
 <156821693963.2951081.11214256396118531359.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com>
 <20190911184332.GL20699@kadam> <9132e214-9b57-07dc-7ee2-f6bc52e960c5@kernel.dk>
 <20190913010937.7fc20d93@lwn.net> <20190913114849.GP20699@kadam>
 <b579153b-3f6d-722c-aea8-abc0d026fa0d@infradead.org> <CAL_JsqLo9-zQYGj2vaEWppbioO0rXu-QNbHhydYdMgrZo0_ESg@mail.gmail.com>
 <f0ad46a34078a2c1eaa013f9b1a5a52becbcd1c5.camel@perches.com>
In-Reply-To: <f0ad46a34078a2c1eaa013f9b1a5a52becbcd1c5.camel@perches.com>
From:   Rob Herring <robherring2@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 13 Sep 2019 14:32:53 -0500
Message-ID: <CAL_JsqKOyLefjdW3a7m8fmqSGXAo4CCx2mZzi-JPf5qKD1NWxA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [PATCH v2 3/3] libnvdimm, MAINTAINERS:
 Maintainer Entry Profile
To:     Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Cc:     Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
        Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@intel.com>,
        ksummit <ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
        linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org>,
        Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@intel.com>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        bpf@vger.kernel.org, Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 11:42 AM Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2019-09-13 at 16:46 +0100, Rob Herring wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 4:00 PM Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> wrote:
> > > On 9/13/19 4:48 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > >
> > > > > So I'm expecting to take this kind of stuff into Documentation/.  My own
> > > > > personal hope is that it can maybe serve to shame some of these "local
> > > > > quirks" out of existence.  The evidence from this brief discussion suggests
> > > > > that this might indeed happen.
> > > >
> > > > I don't think it's shaming, I think it's validating.  Everyone just
> > > > insists that since it's written in the Book of Rules then it's our fault
> > > > for not reading it.  It's like those EULA things where there is more
> > > > text than anyone can physically read in a life time.
> > >
> > > Yes, agreed.
> > >
> > > > And the documentation doesn't help.  For example, I knew people's rules
> > > > about capitalizing the subject but I'd just forget.  I say that if you
> > > > can't be bothered to add it to checkpatch then it means you don't really
> > > > care that strongly.
> > >
> > > If a subsystem requires a certain spelling/capitalization in patch email
> > > subjects, it should be added to MAINTAINERS IMO.  E.g.,
> > > E:      NuBus
> >
> > +1
> >
> > Better make this a regex to deal with (net|net-next).
> >
> > We could probably script populating MAINTAINERS with this using how it
> > is done manually: git log --oneline <dir>
>
> I made a similar proposal nearly a decade ago to add a grammar
> to MAINTAINERS sections for patch subject prefixes.
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1289919077.28741.50.camel@Joe-Laptop/

Perhaps there's more support for it now. I didn't get through all the
thread, but the positions seemed to range from "who cares, subjects
are easy to edit" to "seems like a good idea and doesn't hurt". I
probably would have implemented something, but perl (tacking on to
checkpatch and having you tell me everything wrong is about all I can
do :)).

Rob