Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Tue, 18 Jul 2023 18:55:28 +0200
From:   Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Cc:     corbet@lwn.net, workflows@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        netdev@vger.kernel.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
        linux@leemhuis.info, broonie@kernel.org, krzk@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH docs v2] docs: maintainer: document expectations of small
 time maintainers
Message-ID: <25a50453-cbb6-4933-bb2f-79dfd2c76f9d@lunn.ch>
References: <20230718155814.1674087-1-kuba@kernel.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20230718155814.1674087-1-kuba@kernel.org>
Precedence: bulk

> +Selecting the maintainer
> +========================
> +
> +The previous section described the expectations of the maintainer,
> +this section provides guidance on selecting one and decribes common

s/decribes/describes

> +Maintainers must be human, however, it is not acceptable to add a mailing
> +list or a group email as a maintainer.

I would probably replace however, with therefore. 

> +Removing an inactive maintainer should not be seen as a punitive action.
> +Having an inactive maintainer has a real cost as all developeres have

Too many e's in developeres

Otherwise:

Reviewed-by: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>

    Andrew