Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: correct entry for LVM

[Joe Perches]

On Mon, 2016-04-11 at 19:50 +0100, Wols Lists wrote:
> On 11/04/16 17:39, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> > 
> > On Monday 11 April 2016 09:53 PM, Alasdair G Kergon wrote:
> > > 
> > > On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 09:45:01PM +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > L stands for "Mailing list that is relevant to this area", and this is a
> > > > mailing list. :)
> > > Your proposed patch isn't changing the L entry, so this is of no
> > > relevance.
> > Sorry, I am not understanding.
> > 
> > The current entry in MAINTAINERS is:
> > DEVICE-MAPPER  (LVM)
> > M:      Alasdair Kergon <agk@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > M:      Mike Snitzer <snitzer@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > M:      dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx
> > L:      dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx
> > ...
> > 
> > So my patch just removed the line : "M:      dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx"
> > 
> > So now the entry becomes :
> > DEVICE-MAPPER  (LVM)
> > M:      Alasdair Kergon <agk@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > M:      Mike Snitzer <snitzer@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > L:      dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx
> > ...
> > 
> > So, now it correctly shows dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx as a mailing list which
> > should have cc to all the patches related to LVM.
> > 
> > Or am I understanding this wrong?
> Yes. Because (I guess M stands for maintainer) this list has maintainer
> status. As all patches should be sent to the maintainers therefore all
> patches should be sent to this list.
> 
> The same person can appear twice in a phone book, once under their name
> and once under their job title. This is exactly the same situation -
> this list should appear once as a list to tell people that it's a list,
> AND ALSO as a maintainer to tell people that patches must be sent to the
> list.
> 
> I guess English is not your first language, but the important point is
> that M and L are not mutually exclusive.
> 
I'm a native English speaker and I think that's a not
a good argument.

Having the same entry for M: and L: where M: isn't an
actual person is not a great idea.

The list is not a maintainer.