From: Joe Perches Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/10] Fs: ext4: acl.c: fixed indent issue Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2010 19:03:11 -0700 Message-ID: <1285466591.6115.117.camel@Joe-Laptop> References: <1285439521-2557-1-git-send-email-tdent48227@gmail.com> <20100925233600.GA2854@lst.de> <20100925235643.GA3224@lst.de> <20100926000154.GB5299@thunk.org> <1285459769.6115.74.camel@Joe-Laptop> <20100926003255.GA19690@thunk.org> <1285462243.6115.89.camel@Joe-Laptop> <20100926010410.GC19690@thunk.org> <1285464746.6115.108.camel@Joe-Laptop> <20100926015328.GI19690@thunk.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Andy Whitcroft , Christoph Hellwig , T Dent , adilger.kernel@dilger.ca, jack@suse.cz, dmonakhov@openvz.org, sandeen@redhat.com, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org To: Ted Ts'o Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20100926015328.GI19690@thunk.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org On Sat, 2010-09-25 at 21:53 -0400, Ted Ts'o wrote: > On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 06:32:26PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > > On Sat, 2010-09-25 at 21:04 -0400, Ted Ts'o wrote: > > > But the stupid thing is > > > trying to do it on a file-by-file basis in the first place, when for > > > something like fs/ext4, it really should be done on a subdirectory > > > basis. > > That's not true at all. > No, it *is* true. Someone with brains, as supposed to a stupid > script, would know that fs/ext4 should be treated as a unit. And > there *is* a F: fs/ext4 in the MAINTAINERS script. When you define "it" that way, not as any simple file pattern match, but as a control for what "git log -- path" to inspect, it's quite feasible to use the pattern match rather than the file name. So, thanks, that's a good suggestion. > I don't believe get_maintainers.pl does have legitmate use, since it's > really not that hard to look up something in MAINTAINERS, and if it's > not there, some real human judgement is needed, and not hueristic > guessing --- or at the very least, the script needs to warn that it's > guessing, and maybe explain to the user in detail why it's making the > guesses that it's making, so the user has a chance of understanding > why it might be completely wrong. Multiple warning labels on tools tend to get ignored. People that use tools without training tend to get injured. cheers, Joe