Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1763030AbXHNCPa (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Aug 2007 22:15:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751655AbXHNCPG (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Aug 2007 22:15:06 -0400 Received: from rv-out-0910.google.com ([209.85.198.187]:10249 "EHLO rv-out-0910.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751399AbXHNCPD (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Aug 2007 22:15:03 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=Q5b8zHgurqvzpFCBwn0IMdpo4VJncNl/67hkixUi+K/CvmYAmMuCiWCGx+BwkwmsAE8Agd3w0OKYHzq3SydR+sIp2xMBqMPgw3H/a+0BdGryJ0Q56OEf8S22W85NrkLrWuLV4Q14LMuNoRmjgZ7czl4Wq9kgSyIJEYXwWctTlqg= Message-ID: <1a297b360708131915g2f4fe32ex932631244891643c@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 06:15:02 +0400 From: "Manu Abraham" To: "Arjan van de Ven" Subject: Re: [PATCH] [1/2many] - FInd the maintainer(s) for a patch - scripts/get_maintainer.pl Cc: "Mariusz Kozlowski" , "Joe Perches" , akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org In-Reply-To: <1187026955.2688.4.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <1186984174.10249.7.camel@localhost> <200708131933.10125.m.kozlowski@tuxland.pl> <1187026955.2688.4.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1252 Lines: 31 On 8/13/07, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > On Mon, 2007-08-13 at 19:33 +0200, Mariusz Kozlowski wrote: > > Hello, > > > > I don't recall discusion about this so here are my 3 cents: > > > > I like the idea. > > I don't actually. It shows a central MAINTAINERS file is the wrong > approach; just that 500+ patches to the same file were needed shows > that. > > The maintainer info should be in the source file itself! That's the only > reasonable way to keep it updated; now I'm all for having it machine > parsable so that tools can use it, but it still really should be in the > code itself, not in some central file that will always just go out of > data, and will be a huge source of needless patch conflicts. ACK. Very much agree. In fact MAINTAINERS is a wrong thing altogether. For example, code/drivers under a subsystem, might not be easily add "able" to a central file in some cases as it is scattered around. Maintainer info in the source is the right way to go. - 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/