linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 16/18] MAINTAINERS - Remove L: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org from all but "THE REST"

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20090527060257.GA11029@linux-sh.org>
Date:	Wed, 27 May 2009 15:02:57 +0900
From:	Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 16/18] MAINTAINERS - Remove L: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org from all but "THE REST"

On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 11:00:22PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 27 May 2009 14:50:06 +0900 Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 10:38:38PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2009-05-27 at 10:33 +0900, Paul Mundt wrote:
> > > > On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 10:51:24PM -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
> > > > > Do subsystem maintainers think so?  Unless they do (and tell others
> > > > > so), I don't think it will actually happen.  Until that point, I don't
> > > > > think the L:linux-kernel lines should be removed.
> > > > > 
> > > > Ultimately it should come to common sense. If you are only touching
> > > > subsystem or architecture-specific code and it's unlikely anyone on l-k
> > > > is going to care, or have much to add to it, then there really isn't a
> > > > lot of point in mindlessly Cc-ing the list on every change.
> > > 
> > > And if you already know who or to what list you
> > > want to submit a patch to, the MAINTAINERS entry
> > > doesn't much matter.
> > > 
> > That's not true. If I have to hack something up in some random subsystem
> > then I will often have to hunt for both the list address (if there is one
> > at all!), as well as the folks looking after that code. Yes, I could
> > blindly send it to a given list, but it's much more likely to fall
> > through than sending it directly to the people who care.
> > 
> > MAINTAINERS is very useful for randomly looking up people and email
> > addresses, especially if they aren't people you routinely interact with.
> > It's also much faster to look through than remembering the proper
> > incantation for a specific perl script ;-)
> > 
> > Knowing where to look and knowing who to talk to are two different
> > things. Most subsystem maintainers only interact with a small group of
> > other subsystem maintainers on any sort of regular basis, while things
> > like build errors in -next often send you scurrying one way or the other.
> 
> Most subsystem maintainers shed patches like a hobo does dandruff.  If
> it is cc'ed to lkml then there is a decent chance that I will see it
> and will un-lose it.
> 
> This happens probably 100 or more times per kernel release.

Clearly all of the subsystems that matter are using patchwork ;-)
--
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/