linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 2/3] MAINTAINERS: Add Purism Librem 5 section to the list

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]

Date:   Sun, 30 Aug 2020 08:32:01 -0700
From:   Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:     Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
        Martin Kepplinger <martin.kepplinger@...i.sm>
Cc:     robh@...nel.org, kernel@...i.sm, s.hauer@...gutronix.de,
        kernel@...gutronix.de, festevam@...il.com, linux-imx@....com,
        mchehab@...nel.org, Anson.Huang@....com, agx@...xcpu.org,
        angus@...ea.ca, broonie@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/3] MAINTAINERS: Add Purism Librem 5 section to the
 list

On Sun, 2020-08-30 at 21:15 +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 02:17:54PM +0200, Martin Kepplinger wrote:
> > Add development information for the devicetree files for hardware
> > by Purism SPC.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Martin Kepplinger <martin.kepplinger@...i.sm>
> 
> I decided to drop this patch from my queue, as I took the suggestion
> from Joe and sent a patch to have get_maintainer report email address
> in the dts file.

It's OK to find maintainers in files, but what about the
B: bug reporting and T: source code repository location lines,

Those seem useful.

> > diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
[]
> > @@ -14061,6 +14061,13 @@ T:	git git://linuxtv.org/media_tree.git
> >  F:	Documentation/admin-guide/media/pulse8-cec.rst
> >  F:	drivers/media/cec/usb/pulse8/
> >  
> > +PURISM LIBREM 5
> > +M:	Purism Kernel Team <kernel@...i.sm>

People feel like their mails go into a void when no
responses happen after sending to nameless addresses.

It's better to have a named individual as a maintainer
rather than an unspecified exploder address.

It's OK to have both, but just the exploder doesn't
really have that much value as it's faceless.

> > +S:	Supported
> > +B:	https://source.puri.sm/Librem5/linux-next/issues
> > +T:	https://source.puri.sm/Librem5/linux-next

This T: line should be something else.

Perhaps
W;	https://source.puri.sm/Librem5/linux-next
T:	git https://source.puri.sm/Librem5/linux-next.git

> > +F:	arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8mq-librem5*