linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/1] Add add-maintainer.py script

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:   Sat, 19 Aug 2023 09:53:44 +0200
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Nicolas Schier <nicolas@...sle.eu>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        quic_pkondeti@...cinc.com, u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/1] Add add-maintainer.py script

On 19/08/2023 03:33, Guru Das Srinagesh wrote:
> On Aug 18 2023 10:43, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>> For newcomers, OTOH, I would either recommend simple workflow or just
>>>> use b4. Why? Because if you cannot use git-send-email, then it means
>>>> your email setup will make your life difficult and adding maintainers to
>>>> existing patch won't help you.
>>>
>>> You've mentioned a "simple workflow" many times - could you please share more
>>> details on the steps you follow in your workflow for sending patches?
>>
>> I shared it on LKML few times already (and Rob's git send-email identity
>> is also on LKML), so one more time:
>>
>> https://github.com/krzk/tools/blob/master/linux/.bash_aliases_linux#L91
> 
> Thank you for sharing this - it is really neat indeed and you certainly don't
> need a step #2 with this method.
> 
> However, I see areas for improvement in the alias:
> - Subsystem-specific mailing lists, maintainers, reviewers, and other roles are
>   all marked as "To: " sans distinction via the alias whereas
>   `add-maintainer.py` and `b4` both provide marking of lists as "Cc: " which
>   seems aesthetically and semantically more pleasing.

To or Cc does not matter.

> - Only `add-maintainer.py` allows for maintainers to be selectively in "To: "
>   and "Cc: " for patches in a series depending on whether they are the
>   maintainers for that particular patch or not.

It's intentional to CC everyone. If I wanted to Cc/To
maintainer-per-patch, I would use Rob's send-email identity.

> 
>>>> This tool depends on the command line and shell interface of
>>>> scripts/get_maintainers.pl which is another reason why it might not be a
>>>> good idea.
>>>
>>> Could you please elaborate on why depending on the output of
>>> `get_maintainer.pl` is a bad idea? It's what everyone uses, no?
>>
>> No, because if interface changes you need to update two tools.
> 
> But `b4 prep --auto-to-cc` also uses `get_maintainer.pl`!

Yep, and it's Konstantin's headache to keep it updated. :)

> 
> Also, in your previous email you said to "just use b4", which also depends on
> the command line and shell interface of `get_maintainers.pl`. Depending on
> `get_maintainer.pl` is therefore perfectly okay - there is no need to reinvent
> it or disregard it for whatever reasons.

True, it is okay, but adding more tools to depend on it is more work. b4
is awesome tool, thus I feel it is justified to depend on that
interface. I don't see the need for more tools doing exactly the same.

Best regards,
Krzysztof