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: <f0ad46a34078a2c1eaa013f9b1a5a52becbcd1c5.camel@perches.com>
Date:   Fri, 13 Sep 2019 09:42:27 -0700
From:   Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:     Rob Herring <robherring2@...il.com>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
Cc:     Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
        ksummit <ksummit-discuss@...ts.linuxfoundation.org>,
        linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org>,
        Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        bpf@...r.kernel.org, Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [PATCH v2 3/3] libnvdimm, MAINTAINERS:
 Maintainer Entry Profile

On Fri, 2019-09-13 at 16:46 +0100, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 4:00 PM Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org> wrote:
> > On 9/13/19 4:48 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > 
> > > > So I'm expecting to take this kind of stuff into Documentation/.  My own
> > > > personal hope is that it can maybe serve to shame some of these "local
> > > > quirks" out of existence.  The evidence from this brief discussion suggests
> > > > that this might indeed happen.
> > > 
> > > I don't think it's shaming, I think it's validating.  Everyone just
> > > insists that since it's written in the Book of Rules then it's our fault
> > > for not reading it.  It's like those EULA things where there is more
> > > text than anyone can physically read in a life time.
> > 
> > Yes, agreed.
> > 
> > > And the documentation doesn't help.  For example, I knew people's rules
> > > about capitalizing the subject but I'd just forget.  I say that if you
> > > can't be bothered to add it to checkpatch then it means you don't really
> > > care that strongly.
> > 
> > If a subsystem requires a certain spelling/capitalization in patch email
> > subjects, it should be added to MAINTAINERS IMO.  E.g.,
> > E:      NuBus
> 
> +1
> 
> Better make this a regex to deal with (net|net-next).
> 
> We could probably script populating MAINTAINERS with this using how it
> is done manually: git log --oneline <dir>

I made a similar proposal nearly a decade ago to add a grammar
to MAINTAINERS sections for patch subject prefixes.

https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1289919077.28741.50.camel@Joe-Laptop/


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ