* Validating MAINTAINERS entries? @ 2022-08-10 0:13 Stephen Hemminger 2022-08-10 8:23 ` Greg KH ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Stephen Hemminger @ 2022-08-10 0:13 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ksummit Several times in the past, when using MAINTAINERS list either automatically (or from manual entry) have found the mailing address in the file is no longer valid. What about doing an annual probe mail to all maintainers and sending a patch to prune out any addresses that auto respond as dead. This won't catch ghost entries but would find any dead ones. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: Validating MAINTAINERS entries? 2022-08-10 0:13 Validating MAINTAINERS entries? Stephen Hemminger @ 2022-08-10 8:23 ` Greg KH 2022-08-10 8:26 ` Dan Carpenter 2022-08-10 8:42 ` Lukas Bulwahn 2 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Greg KH @ 2022-08-10 8:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Stephen Hemminger; +Cc: ksummit On Tue, Aug 09, 2022 at 05:13:16PM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > Several times in the past, when using MAINTAINERS list either automatically > (or from manual entry) have found the mailing address in the file is no longer valid. > > What about doing an annual probe mail to all maintainers and sending > a patch to prune out any addresses that auto respond as dead. > This won't catch ghost entries but would find any dead ones. > > Yes, it would be great to sweep the MAINTAINERS file once a year or so. I know others have attempted to do it, but no one has really stuck with it. There's no real reason why anyone can't do this if they want to send the patches for it. thanks, greg k-h ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: Validating MAINTAINERS entries? 2022-08-10 0:13 Validating MAINTAINERS entries? Stephen Hemminger 2022-08-10 8:23 ` Greg KH @ 2022-08-10 8:26 ` Dan Carpenter 2022-08-10 8:36 ` Greg KH 2022-08-10 8:46 ` Lukas Bulwahn 2022-08-10 8:42 ` Lukas Bulwahn 2 siblings, 2 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Dan Carpenter @ 2022-08-10 8:26 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Stephen Hemminger; +Cc: ksummit On Tue, Aug 09, 2022 at 05:13:16PM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > Several times in the past, when using MAINTAINERS list either automatically > (or from manual entry) have found the mailing address in the file is no longer valid. > > What about doing an annual probe mail to all maintainers and sending > a patch to prune out any addresses that auto respond as dead. > This won't catch ghost entries but would find any dead ones. > Also we could add a RETIRED file or something for when people retire and don't want get_maintainer.pl hassling them. regards, dan carpenter ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: Validating MAINTAINERS entries? 2022-08-10 8:26 ` Dan Carpenter @ 2022-08-10 8:36 ` Greg KH 2022-08-10 8:55 ` Lukas Bulwahn 2022-08-10 8:46 ` Lukas Bulwahn 1 sibling, 1 reply; 22+ messages in thread From: Greg KH @ 2022-08-10 8:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dan Carpenter; +Cc: Stephen Hemminger, ksummit On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 11:26:40AM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Tue, Aug 09, 2022 at 05:13:16PM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > Several times in the past, when using MAINTAINERS list either automatically > > (or from manual entry) have found the mailing address in the file is no longer valid. > > > > What about doing an annual probe mail to all maintainers and sending > > a patch to prune out any addresses that auto respond as dead. > > This won't catch ghost entries but would find any dead ones. > > > > Also we could add a RETIRED file or something for when people retire and > don't want get_maintainer.pl hassling them. Isn't that what CREDITS is for? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: Validating MAINTAINERS entries? 2022-08-10 8:36 ` Greg KH @ 2022-08-10 8:55 ` Lukas Bulwahn 2022-08-10 9:10 ` Dan Carpenter 2022-08-10 11:50 ` Lee Jones 0 siblings, 2 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Lukas Bulwahn @ 2022-08-10 8:55 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Greg KH; +Cc: Dan Carpenter, Stephen Hemminger, ksummit On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 10:50 AM Greg KH <greg@kroah.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 11:26:40AM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 09, 2022 at 05:13:16PM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > > Several times in the past, when using MAINTAINERS list either automatically > > > (or from manual entry) have found the mailing address in the file is no longer valid. > > > > > > What about doing an annual probe mail to all maintainers and sending > > > a patch to prune out any addresses that auto respond as dead. > > > This won't catch ghost entries but would find any dead ones. > > > > > > > Also we could add a RETIRED file or something for when people retire and > > don't want get_maintainer.pl hassling them. > > Isn't that what CREDITS is for? > I agree with Greg here. For: "a RETIRED file or something for when people retire" -> CREDITS "don't want get_maintainer.pl hassling them" -> .get_maintainer.ignore Choose what fits for your case. Lukas ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: Validating MAINTAINERS entries? 2022-08-10 8:55 ` Lukas Bulwahn @ 2022-08-10 9:10 ` Dan Carpenter 2022-08-10 11:50 ` Lee Jones 1 sibling, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Dan Carpenter @ 2022-08-10 9:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Lukas Bulwahn; +Cc: Greg KH, Stephen Hemminger, ksummit On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 10:55:44AM +0200, Lukas Bulwahn wrote: > On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 10:50 AM Greg KH <greg@kroah.com> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 11:26:40AM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > > > On Tue, Aug 09, 2022 at 05:13:16PM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > > > Several times in the past, when using MAINTAINERS list either automatically > > > > (or from manual entry) have found the mailing address in the file is no longer valid. > > > > > > > > What about doing an annual probe mail to all maintainers and sending > > > > a patch to prune out any addresses that auto respond as dead. > > > > This won't catch ghost entries but would find any dead ones. > > > > > > > > > > Also we could add a RETIRED file or something for when people retire and > > > don't want get_maintainer.pl hassling them. > > > > Isn't that what CREDITS is for? > > > > I agree with Greg here. > > For: > "a RETIRED file or something for when people retire" -> CREDITS > "don't want get_maintainer.pl hassling them" -> .get_maintainer.ignore > > Choose what fits for your case. Perfect! Thanks. I had no idea about .get_maintainer.ignore and started to implement it myself, but it turns out I am lazy and suck at Perl. regards, dan carpenter ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: Validating MAINTAINERS entries? 2022-08-10 8:55 ` Lukas Bulwahn 2022-08-10 9:10 ` Dan Carpenter @ 2022-08-10 11:50 ` Lee Jones 2022-08-10 12:04 ` Dan Carpenter 1 sibling, 1 reply; 22+ messages in thread From: Lee Jones @ 2022-08-10 11:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Lukas Bulwahn Cc: Greg KH, Dan Carpenter, Stephen Hemminger, ksummit, Lee Jones On Wed, 10 Aug 2022, Lukas Bulwahn wrote: > On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 10:50 AM Greg KH <greg@kroah.com> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 11:26:40AM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > > > On Tue, Aug 09, 2022 at 05:13:16PM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > > > Several times in the past, when using MAINTAINERS list either automatically > > > > (or from manual entry) have found the mailing address in the file is no longer valid. > > > > > > > > What about doing an annual probe mail to all maintainers and sending > > > > a patch to prune out any addresses that auto respond as dead. > > > > This won't catch ghost entries but would find any dead ones. > > > > > > > > > > Also we could add a RETIRED file or something for when people retire and > > > don't want get_maintainer.pl hassling them. > > > > Isn't that what CREDITS is for? > > > > I agree with Greg here. > > For: > "a RETIRED file or something for when people retire" -> CREDITS > "don't want get_maintainer.pl hassling them" -> .get_maintainer.ignore This potentially looks good. Does it ignore completely though? Is there anything I can use that says: "Don't suggest mailing me for any files I'm not the maintainer of?" I am presently plagued with reviews for lots of files that I've touched over the years. Even if the changes were trivial. Or is this just an education point? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: Validating MAINTAINERS entries? 2022-08-10 11:50 ` Lee Jones @ 2022-08-10 12:04 ` Dan Carpenter 2022-08-10 12:12 ` Serge E. Hallyn 2022-08-10 12:50 ` Mark Brown 0 siblings, 2 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Dan Carpenter @ 2022-08-10 12:04 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Lee Jones; +Cc: Lukas Bulwahn, Greg KH, Stephen Hemminger, ksummit, Lee Jones On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 12:50:50PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > > I am presently plagued with reviews for lots of files that I've > touched over the years. Even if the changes were trivial. > > Or is this just an education point? Education is not the answer. We've got thousands of devs and no one can keep track of everyone and their motives. When I send patches, there are few people that I know what they're about and I manually delete them. I also know which mailing lists those people read so normally they're going to get the email even if they're not on the CC list. Other times, I wonder why maintainers are still on the CC list if they haven't been active in years. But I'm not going to manually remove them. It's worse to get chewed out for not CCing someone than for including them. The one split which is quite confusing to me is the netdev vs wireless split. For wireless patches, I generelly delete all the netdev maintainers. Some people I'm not sure what they care about so I leave them. regards, dan carpenter ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: Validating MAINTAINERS entries? 2022-08-10 12:04 ` Dan Carpenter @ 2022-08-10 12:12 ` Serge E. Hallyn 2022-08-10 12:50 ` Mark Brown 1 sibling, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Serge E. Hallyn @ 2022-08-10 12:12 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dan Carpenter Cc: Lee Jones, Lukas Bulwahn, Greg KH, Stephen Hemminger, ksummit, Lee Jones On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 03:04:50PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 12:50:50PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > > > > I am presently plagued with reviews for lots of files that I've > > touched over the years. Even if the changes were trivial. > > > > Or is this just an education point? > > Education is not the answer. > > We've got thousands of devs and no one can keep track of everyone and > their motives. > > When I send patches, there are few people that I know what they're about > and I manually delete them. I also know which mailing lists those > people read so normally they're going to get the email even if they're > not on the CC list. > > Other times, I wonder why maintainers are still on the CC list if they > haven't been active in years. But I'm not going to manually remove > them. It's worse to get chewed out for not CCing someone than for > including them. Huh. Chewed out for including them? I had always thought that was *the* point of MAINTAINERS. Now, with lei (<3), MAINTAINERS becomes less important, as I can search for the files/functions I'm interested in, and until someone starts sending spam including patch hunks just to get pulled into such searches that's more reliable than my shoddy spam filtering attempts on personal email :) The latter dropping important emails and letting through spam... > The one split which is quite confusing to me is the netdev vs wireless > split. For wireless patches, I generelly delete all the netdev > maintainers. Some people I'm not sure what they care about so I leave > them. > > regards, > dan carpenter ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: Validating MAINTAINERS entries? 2022-08-10 12:04 ` Dan Carpenter 2022-08-10 12:12 ` Serge E. Hallyn @ 2022-08-10 12:50 ` Mark Brown 2022-08-10 13:25 ` Lee Jones 2022-08-11 8:35 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 1 sibling, 2 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Mark Brown @ 2022-08-10 12:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dan Carpenter Cc: Lee Jones, Lukas Bulwahn, Greg KH, Stephen Hemminger, ksummit, Lee Jones [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 780 bytes --] On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 03:04:50PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 12:50:50PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > > I am presently plagued with reviews for lots of files that I've > > touched over the years. Even if the changes were trivial. > > Or is this just an education point? > Education is not the answer. > We've got thousands of devs and no one can keep track of everyone and > their motives. I think the issue there is more that if someone sent a drive by patch to some driver they'll start showing up in the git history and often get CCed on future changes going forwards, which can then result in getting copied into further postings done by copying from prior postings. That does feel somewhat tractable to education, at least in the early stages. [-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: Validating MAINTAINERS entries? 2022-08-10 12:50 ` Mark Brown @ 2022-08-10 13:25 ` Lee Jones 2022-08-10 13:54 ` Rob Herring 2022-08-11 8:35 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 1 sibling, 1 reply; 22+ messages in thread From: Lee Jones @ 2022-08-10 13:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Mark Brown Cc: Dan Carpenter, Lee Jones, Lukas Bulwahn, Greg KH, Stephen Hemminger, ksummit On Wed, 10 Aug 2022, Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 03:04:50PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 12:50:50PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > > > > I am presently plagued with reviews for lots of files that I've > > > touched over the years. Even if the changes were trivial. > > > > Or is this just an education point? > > > Education is not the answer. > > > We've got thousands of devs and no one can keep track of everyone and > > their motives. > > I think the issue there is more that if someone sent a drive by patch to > some driver they'll start showing up in the git history and often get > CCed on future changes going forwards, which can then result in getting > copied into further postings done by copying from prior postings. That > does feel somewhat tractable to education, at least in the early stages. How about default tooling values, get_maintainer.pl in this case? I tend to over-ride this default to 75% to avoid the aforementioned: --git-min-percent => minimum percentage of commits required (default: 5) 5 is not a lot of percent for seldomly touched source files. -- Lee Jones [李琼斯] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: Validating MAINTAINERS entries? 2022-08-10 13:25 ` Lee Jones @ 2022-08-10 13:54 ` Rob Herring 2022-08-10 14:01 ` Mark Brown 2022-08-10 15:29 ` Lee Jones 0 siblings, 2 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Rob Herring @ 2022-08-10 13:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Lee Jones Cc: Mark Brown, Dan Carpenter, Lee Jones, Lukas Bulwahn, Greg KH, Stephen Hemminger, ksummit On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 7:25 AM Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org> wrote: > > On Wed, 10 Aug 2022, Mark Brown wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 03:04:50PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 12:50:50PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > > > > > > I am presently plagued with reviews for lots of files that I've > > > > touched over the years. Even if the changes were trivial. After your W=1 and kerneldoc fixes, you're screwed. ;) > > > > > > Or is this just an education point? > > > > > Education is not the answer. Yes. I'm convinced there is no way to solve these problems on the sender side. I see plenty of cases of not running get_maintainers.pl. You've got to filter out what you want on your end. And lei is great for that. > > > We've got thousands of devs and no one can keep track of everyone and > > > their motives. > > > > I think the issue there is more that if someone sent a drive by patch to > > some driver they'll start showing up in the git history and often get > > CCed on future changes going forwards, which can then result in getting > > copied into further postings done by copying from prior postings. That > > does feel somewhat tractable to education, at least in the early stages. > > How about default tooling values, get_maintainer.pl in this case? > > I tend to over-ride this default to 75% to avoid the aforementioned: > > --git-min-percent => minimum percentage of commits required (default: 5) > > 5 is not a lot of percent for seldomly touched source files. Send a patch. I would also bump --git-min-signatures from 1. Rob ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: Validating MAINTAINERS entries? 2022-08-10 13:54 ` Rob Herring @ 2022-08-10 14:01 ` Mark Brown 2022-08-10 14:19 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev 2022-08-10 14:20 ` Rob Herring 2022-08-10 15:29 ` Lee Jones 1 sibling, 2 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Mark Brown @ 2022-08-10 14:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Rob Herring Cc: Lee Jones, Dan Carpenter, Lee Jones, Lukas Bulwahn, Greg KH, Stephen Hemminger, ksummit [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 811 bytes --] On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 07:54:59AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote: > On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 7:25 AM Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org> wrote: > > On Wed, 10 Aug 2022, Mark Brown wrote: > > > > Education is not the answer. > Yes. I'm convinced there is no way to solve these problems on the > sender side. I see plenty of cases of not running get_maintainers.pl. We can't solve problems, but we can make things a bit better. > You've got to filter out what you want on your end. And lei is great > for that. lei is too new for Debian stable :/ > > --git-min-percent => minimum percentage of commits required (default: 5) > > 5 is not a lot of percent for seldomly touched source files. > Send a patch. I would also bump --git-min-signatures from 1. Will that do the right thing in cases like recently added files? [-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: Validating MAINTAINERS entries? 2022-08-10 14:01 ` Mark Brown @ 2022-08-10 14:19 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev 2022-08-10 14:20 ` Rob Herring 1 sibling, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Konstantin Ryabitsev @ 2022-08-10 14:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Mark Brown Cc: Rob Herring, Lee Jones, Dan Carpenter, Lee Jones, Lukas Bulwahn, Greg KH, Stephen Hemminger, ksummit On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 03:01:17PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > > You've got to filter out what you want on your end. And lei is great > > for that. > > lei is too new for Debian stable :/ We also have plans to have centrally-managed lei filtering, available via read-only mailboxes. This way "trawl all lists for relevant messages" can happen on the kernel.org end and maintainers can make use of pre-filtered data. -K ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: Validating MAINTAINERS entries? 2022-08-10 14:01 ` Mark Brown 2022-08-10 14:19 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev @ 2022-08-10 14:20 ` Rob Herring 2022-08-10 14:35 ` Mark Brown 1 sibling, 1 reply; 22+ messages in thread From: Rob Herring @ 2022-08-10 14:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Mark Brown Cc: Lee Jones, Dan Carpenter, Lee Jones, Lukas Bulwahn, Greg KH, Stephen Hemminger, ksummit On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 8:01 AM Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 07:54:59AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 7:25 AM Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org> wrote: > > > On Wed, 10 Aug 2022, Mark Brown wrote: > > > > > > Education is not the answer. > > > Yes. I'm convinced there is no way to solve these problems on the > > sender side. I see plenty of cases of not running get_maintainers.pl. > > We can't solve problems, but we can make things a bit better. > > > You've got to filter out what you want on your end. And lei is great > > for that. > > lei is too new for Debian stable :/ Meaning it's not packaged or needs newer dependencies? > > > --git-min-percent => minimum percentage of commits required (default: 5) > > > > 5 is not a lot of percent for seldomly touched source files. > > > Send a patch. I would also bump --git-min-signatures from 1. > > Will that do the right thing in cases like recently added files? Yes, because I'm sure checkpatch.pl was run on the patch adding the files and it tells you 'added file, need a MAINTAINERS entry?'. Really, I would (and do) turn off gitfallback completely by default. If someone wants to be CCed and there's not a MAINTAINERS entry, then that's on them. Rob ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: Validating MAINTAINERS entries? 2022-08-10 14:20 ` Rob Herring @ 2022-08-10 14:35 ` Mark Brown 2022-08-11 12:36 ` Sudip Mukherjee 0 siblings, 1 reply; 22+ messages in thread From: Mark Brown @ 2022-08-10 14:35 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Rob Herring Cc: Lee Jones, Dan Carpenter, Lee Jones, Lukas Bulwahn, Greg KH, Stephen Hemminger, ksummit [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 992 bytes --] On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 08:20:32AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote: > On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 8:01 AM Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 07:54:59AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote: > > > You've got to filter out what you want on your end. And lei is great > > > for that. > > lei is too new for Debian stable :/ > Meaning it's not packaged or needs newer dependencies? IIRC it (well, public-inbox) is packaged but is an old version without the lei functionality, and/or there were some dependency issues. It was a while ago that I looked. > > Will that do the right thing in cases like recently added files? > Yes, because I'm sure checkpatch.pl was run on the patch adding the > files and it tells you 'added file, need a MAINTAINERS entry?'. Right, if people run and pay attention to checkpatch. > Really, I would (and do) turn off gitfallback completely by default. > If someone wants to be CCed and there's not a MAINTAINERS entry, then > that's on them. Yes. [-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: Validating MAINTAINERS entries? 2022-08-10 14:35 ` Mark Brown @ 2022-08-11 12:36 ` Sudip Mukherjee 0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Sudip Mukherjee @ 2022-08-11 12:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Mark Brown Cc: Rob Herring, Lee Jones, Dan Carpenter, Lee Jones, Lukas Bulwahn, Greg KH, Stephen Hemminger, ksummit On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 3:36 PM Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 08:20:32AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 8:01 AM Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 07:54:59AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote: > > > > > You've got to filter out what you want on your end. And lei is great > > > > for that. > > > > lei is too new for Debian stable :/ > > > Meaning it's not packaged or needs newer dependencies? > > IIRC it (well, public-inbox) is packaged but is an old version without > the lei functionality, and/or there were some dependency issues. It was > a while ago that I looked. v1.8.0 which is the latest, is in Debian and also in bullseye-backports. -- Regards Sudip ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: Validating MAINTAINERS entries? 2022-08-10 13:54 ` Rob Herring 2022-08-10 14:01 ` Mark Brown @ 2022-08-10 15:29 ` Lee Jones 1 sibling, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Lee Jones @ 2022-08-10 15:29 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Rob Herring Cc: Mark Brown, Dan Carpenter, Lee Jones, Lukas Bulwahn, Greg KH, Stephen Hemminger, ksummit On Wed, 10 Aug 2022, Rob Herring wrote: > On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 7:25 AM Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > On Wed, 10 Aug 2022, Mark Brown wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 03:04:50PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > > > > On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 12:50:50PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > > > > > > > > I am presently plagued with reviews for lots of files that I've > > > > > touched over the years. Even if the changes were trivial. > > After your W=1 and kerneldoc fixes, you're screwed. ;) Yes, and the tragic thing is, I still have aspirations to go finish that! > > > > > Or is this just an education point? > > > > > > > Education is not the answer. > > Yes. I'm convinced there is no way to solve these problems on the > sender side. I see plenty of cases of not running get_maintainers.pl. > You've got to filter out what you want on your end. And lei is great > for that. > > > > > We've got thousands of devs and no one can keep track of everyone and > > > > their motives. > > > > > > I think the issue there is more that if someone sent a drive by patch to > > > some driver they'll start showing up in the git history and often get > > > CCed on future changes going forwards, which can then result in getting > > > copied into further postings done by copying from prior postings. That > > > does feel somewhat tractable to education, at least in the early stages. > > > > How about default tooling values, get_maintainer.pl in this case? > > > > I tend to over-ride this default to 75% to avoid the aforementioned: > > > > --git-min-percent => minimum percentage of commits required (default: 5) > > > > 5 is not a lot of percent for seldomly touched source files. > > Send a patch. I would also bump --git-min-signatures from 1. I can do that. Fair warning, it won't be until around mid-cycle. -- Lee Jones [李琼斯] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: Validating MAINTAINERS entries? 2022-08-10 12:50 ` Mark Brown 2022-08-10 13:25 ` Lee Jones @ 2022-08-11 8:35 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 2022-08-11 8:42 ` Christoph Hellwig 1 sibling, 1 reply; 22+ messages in thread From: Geert Uytterhoeven @ 2022-08-11 8:35 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Mark Brown Cc: Dan Carpenter, Lee Jones, Lukas Bulwahn, Greg KH, Stephen Hemminger, ksummit, Lee Jones On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 2:50 PM Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 03:04:50PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 12:50:50PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > > > I am presently plagued with reviews for lots of files that I've > > > touched over the years. Even if the changes were trivial. > > > > Or is this just an education point? > > > Education is not the answer. > > > We've got thousands of devs and no one can keep track of everyone and > > their motives. > > I think the issue there is more that if someone sent a drive by patch to > some driver they'll start showing up in the git history and often get > CCed on future changes going forwards, which can then result in getting > copied into further postings done by copying from prior postings. That > does feel somewhat tractable to education, at least in the early stages. And for drive-by changes to Kconfig files or Makefiles, it is amplified to any other sections in these files :-( Perhaps scripts/get_maintainer.pl can be taught to only consider the subsystem maintainer, and ignore git history, for changes to Makefiles and Kconfig files? Or move the Kconfig/Makefile bits into the driver sources, next to the MODULE_*() bits, which I believe was part of Roman Zippel's big plan when he wrote the new Kconfig system... Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: Validating MAINTAINERS entries? 2022-08-11 8:35 ` Geert Uytterhoeven @ 2022-08-11 8:42 ` Christoph Hellwig 0 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2022-08-11 8:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Geert Uytterhoeven Cc: Mark Brown, Dan Carpenter, Lee Jones, Lukas Bulwahn, Greg KH, Stephen Hemminger, ksummit, Lee Jones On Thu, Aug 11, 2022 at 10:35:52AM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Perhaps scripts/get_maintainer.pl can be taught to only consider the > subsystem maintainer, and ignore git history, for changes to Makefiles > and Kconfig files? In general looking at git history is pretty much always the wrong thing, except maybe for the initial commit. > Or move the Kconfig/Makefile bits into the driver sources, next to > the MODULE_*() bits, which I believe was part of Roman Zippel's big > plan when he wrote the new Kconfig system... I don't think having Kconfig in source files is a good thing. Being able to integrate the Makefile into Kconfig OTOH would be really nice.. config FOOBAR tristate 'Foo driver' depends on PCI help This is the driver for the foo hardware. module foo sources foo_core.c foo_sysfs.c foo_debugfs.c ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: Validating MAINTAINERS entries? 2022-08-10 8:26 ` Dan Carpenter 2022-08-10 8:36 ` Greg KH @ 2022-08-10 8:46 ` Lukas Bulwahn 1 sibling, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Lukas Bulwahn @ 2022-08-10 8:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dan Carpenter; +Cc: Stephen Hemminger, ksummit On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 10:27 AM Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 09, 2022 at 05:13:16PM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > Several times in the past, when using MAINTAINERS list either automatically > > (or from manual entry) have found the mailing address in the file is no longer valid. > > > > What about doing an annual probe mail to all maintainers and sending > > a patch to prune out any addresses that auto respond as dead. > > This won't catch ghost entries but would find any dead ones. > > > > Also we could add a RETIRED file or something for when people retire and > don't want get_maintainer.pl hassling them. > Dan, I believe this exists already: .get_maintainer.ignore For many years, there was only one developer using this feature, now we have at least two developers. It seems that many others resolve this issue just in their local setup differently, though. Lukas ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
* Re: Validating MAINTAINERS entries? 2022-08-10 0:13 Validating MAINTAINERS entries? Stephen Hemminger 2022-08-10 8:23 ` Greg KH 2022-08-10 8:26 ` Dan Carpenter @ 2022-08-10 8:42 ` Lukas Bulwahn 2 siblings, 0 replies; 22+ messages in thread From: Lukas Bulwahn @ 2022-08-10 8:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: stephen; +Cc: ksummit On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 2:13 AM Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org> wrote: > > Several times in the past, when using MAINTAINERS list either automatically > (or from manual entry) have found the mailing address in the file is no longer valid. > > What about doing an annual probe mail to all maintainers and sending > a patch to prune out any addresses that auto respond as dead. > This won't catch ghost entries but would find any dead ones. > In many cases, you can avoid the noise of sending out a probe mail, but simply checking the lore.kernel.org archives for an email response from that email within the last year. Many maintainers are simply going to be active, so that. Then, you may consider just the remaining cases: Some maintainers use a different email for responding than for receiving patches. The email address for receiving patches is in MAINTAINERS, the email address for responding is visible on lore.kernel.org. Some maintainers do not even need to respond within the last year, as no patches were sent to the maintainer's area of responsibility. Some emails are in fact dead. Alternatively, you could just offer "a service" for kernel developers to forward the automated emails from servers, when an email is dead, to some other email, and then, you go through those and create the needed patches to MAINTAINERS. Anyway, creating this clean-up patch for MAINTAINERS is probably still some semi-automated effort and not fully automatic (as e.g., you probably want to split this patch going to different subsystem maintainers and get their acknowledgement), though. I am also aware of many other clean-up aspects in MAINTAINERS. Just trying to keep ./scripts/get_maintainer.pl --self-test=patterns without warnings is already a task that can keep you busy, which I now know from trying to do so for two or three years. Lukas ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 22+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2022-08-11 12:36 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 22+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2022-08-10 0:13 Validating MAINTAINERS entries? Stephen Hemminger 2022-08-10 8:23 ` Greg KH 2022-08-10 8:26 ` Dan Carpenter 2022-08-10 8:36 ` Greg KH 2022-08-10 8:55 ` Lukas Bulwahn 2022-08-10 9:10 ` Dan Carpenter 2022-08-10 11:50 ` Lee Jones 2022-08-10 12:04 ` Dan Carpenter 2022-08-10 12:12 ` Serge E. Hallyn 2022-08-10 12:50 ` Mark Brown 2022-08-10 13:25 ` Lee Jones 2022-08-10 13:54 ` Rob Herring 2022-08-10 14:01 ` Mark Brown 2022-08-10 14:19 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev 2022-08-10 14:20 ` Rob Herring 2022-08-10 14:35 ` Mark Brown 2022-08-11 12:36 ` Sudip Mukherjee 2022-08-10 15:29 ` Lee Jones 2022-08-11 8:35 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 2022-08-11 8:42 ` Christoph Hellwig 2022-08-10 8:46 ` Lukas Bulwahn 2022-08-10 8:42 ` Lukas Bulwahn
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).