linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: Start using the 'reviewer' (R) tag

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: <5630CA06.7050503@samsung.com>
Date:	Wed, 28 Oct 2015 22:13:42 +0900
From:	Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>
To:	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
	Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
Cc:	k.kozlowski.k@...il.com, wsa@...-dreams.de,
	linus.walleij@...aro.org, Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@...sung.com>,
	broonie@...nel.org, ben-linux@...ff.org,
	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: Start using the 'reviewer' (R) tag

W dniu 28.10.2015 o 18:55, Lee Jones pisze:
> On Wed, 28 Oct 2015, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> 
>> Hello,
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 06:23:37PM +0900, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On 28.10.2015 17:24, Lee Jones wrote:
>>>> You guys are pushing back like this is some kind of demotion.
>>>> That's not the case at all.  All it does is better describe the (very
>>>> worthy) function you *actually* provide.
>>>
>>> It is getting into dispute about entire change of yours... which is not
>>> what I want. I agree with your general idea but I was referring only to
>>> that particular case - the Samsung PMICs (and Maxim PMICs/MUICs which
>>> would fall into same category).
>>
>> Not being affected by this change, I wonder what the technical
>> difference is if someone is listed as reviewer instead of maintainer.
>> Does get_maintainer.pl behave differently?
> 
> Reviewers are people who should be Cc'ed on all patches, as are
> Maintainers, so no, fundamentally they are treated the same by a
> Submitter.
> 
> Here is some output for Maintainers/Reviews from get_maintainer.pl.
> 
>  $ ./scripts/get_maintainer.pl -f arch/arm/boot/dts/vf500.dtsi
>  Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org> (maintainer:ARM/FREESCALE VYBRID ARM ARCHITECTURE)
>  Sascha Hauer <kernel@...gutronix.de> (maintainer:ARM/FREESCALE VYBRID ARM ARCHITECTURE)
>  Stefan Agner <stefan@...er.ch> (reviewer)
>  Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk> (maintainer:ARM PORT)
>  linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org (moderated list:ARM/FREESCALE VYBRID ARM ARCHITECTURE)
>  devicetree@...r.kernel.org (open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS)
>  linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org (open list)
> 
> I'm sure we can make the output even more similar by listing the
> MAINTAINERS tag after "reviewer" too.

And here is the output of drivers/mfd/sec-core.c *before*:
Sangbeom Kim <sbkim73@...sung.com> (supporter:SAMSUNG MULTIFUNCTION PMIC DEVICE DRIVERS)
Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com> (supporter:SAMSUNG MULTIFUNCTION PMIC DEVICE DRIVERS)
Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org> (supporter:MULTIFUNCTION DEVICES (MFD))


and after (where I am listed as reviewer):
Sangbeom Kim <sbkim73@...sung.com> (reviewer)
Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com> (reviewer)
Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org> (supporter:MULTIFUNCTION DEVICES (MFD))

Maybe it should be "supporter reviewer"?

Best regards,
Krzysztof

--
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/