linux-kernel - [PATCH] get_maintainer: only show lkml as last resort

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20210706083354.214826-1-hannu@hrtk.in>
Date:   Tue,  6 Jul 2021 11:33:55 +0300
From:   Hannu Hartikainen <hannu@...k.in>
To:     Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Hannu Hartikainen <hannu@...k.in>
Subject: [PATCH] get_maintainer: only show lkml as last resort

The documentation implies that patches should be primarily sent to a
subsystem-specific mailing list [0]. Make get_maintainer only return the
generic linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org ("THE REST") list when no other
matching mailing list is found.

Most patches sent to lkml today are also sent to some other list. This
change should lower the message volume on lkml in the long run, making
the list more useful for those cases where it's the only option.

[0]: Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst:
> You should also normally choose at least one mailing list to receive a
> copy of your patch set. linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org functions as a
> list of last resort, but the volume on that list has caused a number of
> developers to tune it out. Look in the MAINTAINERS file for a
> subsystem-specific list; your patch will probably get more attention
> there.

Signed-off-by: Hannu Hartikainen <hannu@...k.in>
---

I'm not sure if this is technically the best solution so I'm looking
forward to review comments. But process-wise I think this should be a
good change. Looking at tutorials and such, many people seem to just
blindly run scripts/get_maintainer.pl and send their patches to all the
addresses the script outputs. This must inflate the list a lot, making
it difficult to follow and making it much more difficult to get readers
for patches belonging to the list (including this one, ironically).

 scripts/get_maintainer.pl | 19 +++++++++++++------
 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/scripts/get_maintainer.pl b/scripts/get_maintainer.pl
index 2075db0c08b8..c0a8dd5dfdbf 100755
--- a/scripts/get_maintainer.pl
+++ b/scripts/get_maintainer.pl
@@ -627,6 +627,7 @@ my %email_hash_address;
 my @email_to = ();
 my %hash_list_to;
 my @list_to = ();
+my @list_the_rest_to = ();
 my @scm = ();
 my @web = ();
 my @subsystem = ();
@@ -951,6 +952,11 @@ sub get_maintainers {
 	}
     }

+    # if no other list would be printed, fall back to THE REST
+    if (scalar(@list_to) == 0) {
+	@list_to = @list_the_rest_to
+    }
+
     foreach my $email (@email_to, @list_to) {
 	$email->[0] = deduplicate_email($email->[0]);
     }
@@ -1303,10 +1309,6 @@ sub get_list_role {

     my $subsystem = get_subsystem_name($index);

-    if ($subsystem eq "THE REST") {
-	$subsystem = "";
-    }
-
     return $subsystem;
 }

@@ -1355,8 +1357,13 @@ sub add_categories {
 				}
 			    } else {
 				$hash_list_to{lc($list_address)} = 1;
-				push(@list_to, [$list_address,
-						"open list${list_role}"]);
+				if ($list_role eq ":THE REST") {
+				    push(@list_the_rest_to, [$list_address,
+							     "open list"]);
+				} else {
+				    push(@list_to, [$list_address,
+						    "open list${list_role}"]);
+				}
 			    }
 			}
 		    }
-- 
2.32.0