[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <46C067AE.3090409@s5r6.in-berlin.de>
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 16:16:14 +0200
From: Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>
To: David Brownell <david-b@...bell.net>
CC: joe@...ches.com, linux-usb-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
linux-usb-users@...ts.sourceforge.net,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, johannes@...felt.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [linux-usb-devel] [PATCH] [497/2many] MAINTAINERS - USB HUB DRIVER
David Brownell wrote:
> Is there general agreement that these "F:" entries should be used?
> Rather than, say, embedding references in the relevant parts of
> the source tree, adjacent to those files, where they would be more
> visible to people making relevant changes.
>
> I'm also concerned with the reality that the MAINTAINERS file is
> not accurate. The $SUBJECT patch is one example; the named maintainer
> is no longer active (in that area, at least) and the named driver is
> not actually separable from the rest of usbcore. Better IMO to just
> remove the "hub driver" entry.
I don't speak for Joe, but: If there is a good mapping from MAINTAINERS
to paths then more submitters will use MAINTAINERS more frequently. A
side effect would be that outdated entries in MAINTAINERS would become
apparent more quickly, and updated more quickly. Of course that's just
speculation --- but your comment on this "hub driver" entry, prompted by
Joe's patch, seems to support that speculation.
--
Stefan Richter
-=====-=-=== =--- -==-=
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists