linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: make linux-mediatek list remarks consistent

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:   Mon, 14 Sep 2020 17:23:58 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@...il.com>
To:     David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
cc:     Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@...il.com>,
        Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
        Ryder Lee <ryder.lee@...iatek.com>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org,
        Ralf Ramsauer <ralf.ramsauer@...-regensburg.de>,
        Pia Eichinger <pia.eichinger@...oth-regensburg.de>,
        Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: make linux-mediatek list remarks
 consistent



On Mon, 14 Sep 2020, David Woodhouse wrote:

> On Mon, 2020-09-14 at 16:57 +0200, Lukas Bulwahn wrote:
> > Well, I am happy to send any PATCH v2. I guess we, you, David, Matthias 
> > and I, now just need to determine if the list is moderated or not.
> 
> It really isn't.
> 
>  # /usr/lib/mailman/bin/config_list -o- linux-mediatek | grep -B5 ^generic_nonmember_action
> # legal values are:
> #    0 = "Accept"
> #    1 = "Hold"
> #    2 = "Reject"
> #    3 = "Discard"
> generic_nonmember_action = 0
> 

David, I guess if you have access to the ground truth on 
lists.infradead.org, maybe you can dump the actual setting for all those 
lists?

$ grep "lists.infradead.org" MAINTAINERS | sort | uniq

L:	ath10k@...ts.infradead.org
L:	ath11k@...ts.infradead.org
L:	b43-dev@...ts.infradead.org
L:	kexec@...ts.infradead.org
L:	libertas-dev@...ts.infradead.org
L:	linux-afs@...ts.infradead.org
L:	linux-amlogic@...ts.infradead.org
L:	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
L:	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org (moderated for non-subscribers)
L:	linux-geode@...ts.infradead.org (moderated for non-subscribers)
L:	linux-i3c@...ts.infradead.org (moderated for non-subscribers)
L:	linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org
L:	linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org (moderated for non-subscribers)
L:	linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org
L:	linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org
L:	linux-parport@...ts.infradead.org (subscribers-only)
L:	linux-realtek-soc@...ts.infradead.org (moderated for non-subscribers)
L:	linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org
L:	linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org
L:	linux-rpi-kernel@...ts.infradead.org (moderated for non-subscribers)
L:	linux-snps-arc@...ts.infradead.org
L:	linux-um@...ts.infradead.org
L:	linux-unisoc@...ts.infradead.org (moderated for non-subscribers)
L:	wcn36xx@...ts.infradead.org


They are all reporting different settings and linux-mediatek and 
linux-arm-kernel even inconsistently. The inconsistency and a poor attempt 
to resolve that is what started this discussion.

I can then send out the patch to adjust MAINTAINERS to your ground truth 
from the server.

Thanks for your support,

Lukas