Re: [PATCH] get_maintainer: Don't fallback to git by default

[Javier Martinez Canillas]

Hello,

On 10/28/2015 03:09 AM, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Oct 2015, Joe Perches wrote:
> 
>> On Tue, 2015-10-27 at 08:21 +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
>>> On Mon, 26 Oct 2015, joe@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>>>> On 2015-10-26 19:47, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
>>>>> What if we have a git_fallback "auto" mode which only falls back to
>>>>> using git if there is no entry in the MAINTAINERS file?  That might
>>>>> address the concern which Laura raised, without blocking this
>>>>> change until the MAINTAINERS file is fully populated.
>>>>
>>>> That's what happens already right now.
>>>
>>> I think it can be done better.
>>>
>>> FYI, this patch came about because I keep complaining about submitters
>>> sending me patches I really shouldn't have to care about.
>>
>> Then you should add your name to the .get_maintainer.ignore file.
>>
>> If you do, you'll only get listed by get_maintainer for files where
>> you have a specific entry in MAINTAINERS.
> 
> Oooo... I didn't even know that existed.  It's an idea, but I'd rather
> have these kinds of issues sorted out for everyone, rather than being
> a special case and putting myself in the grumpy-old-b***** file.  I'm
> certainly not the only one suffering with this problem.
>

I agree with Lee here, if everyone has to be added to a file then that
solution does not scale. I bet that no one working on the kernel would
say that is OK on receiving random patches.

>>> Here is the most recent offending command output:
>>>
>>>   $ ./scripts/get_maintainer.pl -f drivers/i2c/busses/Kconfig
>>>   Wolfram Sang <wsa@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> (maintainer:I2C SUBSYSTEM,commit_signer:26/26=100%,authored:3/26=12%,removed_lines:3/11=27%)
>>>   Lee Jones <lee.jones@xxxxxxxxxx> (commit_signer:3/26=12%)
>>>   Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> (commit_signer:3/26=12%,authored:3/26=12%,removed_lines:2/11=18%)
>>>   David Box <david.e.box@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> (commit_signer:3/26=12%,added_lines:11/146=8%)
>>>   Jean Delvare <jdelvare@xxxxxxx> (commit_signer:2/26=8%)
>>>   Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> (authored:2/26=8%,removed_lines:2/11=18%)
>>>   Neelesh Gupta <neelegup@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> (added_lines:11/146=8%)
>>>   James Hogan <james.hogan@xxxxxxxxxx> (added_lines:10/146=7%)
>>>   Ray Jui <rjui@xxxxxxxxxxxx> (added_lines:10/146=7%)
>>>   Joachim Eastwood <manabian@xxxxxxxxx> (added_lines:10/146=7%)
>>>   Andrew Bresticker <abrestic@xxxxxxxxxxxx> (removed_lines:2/11=18%)
>>>   Zhangfei Gao <zhangfei.gao@xxxxxxxxxx> (removed_lines:1/11=9%)
>>>   linux-i2c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (open list:I2C SUBSYSTEM)
>>>   linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (open list)
>>>
>>> Anyone south of Wolfram and north of the I2C ML is unlikely to care.
>>>
>>> Please find a way to make this better.  For the sake of our sanity.
>>

Another option is to bump the git-fallback min % used as a threshold,
for example when using a min value of 20 the list is more sensible:

$ ./scripts/get_maintainer.pl -f --git-min-percent=20 drivers/i2c/busses/Kconfig 
Wolfram Sang <wsa@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> (maintainer:I2C SUBSYSTEM,commit_signer:26/26=100%,removed_lines:3/11=27%)
linux-i2c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (open list:I2C SUBSYSTEM)
linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (open list)

>> Your sanity must be pretty darn fragile.
> 
> Ticking time-bomb, me. ;)
> 

Is not only Lee tbh, I see people complaining almost on a daily so
the current default is not good enough. This of course annoys more
to maintainers that already have a very heavy email load but it is
also inconvenient for developers like me since by doing a change
on a file that is frequently modified (i.e: Makefile, Kconfig, etc)
you earn a life of spam :)

Best regards,
-- 
Javier Martinez Canillas
Open Source Group
Samsung Research America
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/