Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [PATCH v2 3/3] libnvdimm, MAINTAINERS: Maintainer Entry Profile

[Joe Perches]

On Fri, 2019-09-13 at 16:46 +0100, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 4:00 PM Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On 9/13/19 4:48 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > 
> > > > So I'm expecting to take this kind of stuff into Documentation/.  My own
> > > > personal hope is that it can maybe serve to shame some of these "local
> > > > quirks" out of existence.  The evidence from this brief discussion suggests
> > > > that this might indeed happen.
> > > 
> > > I don't think it's shaming, I think it's validating.  Everyone just
> > > insists that since it's written in the Book of Rules then it's our fault
> > > for not reading it.  It's like those EULA things where there is more
> > > text than anyone can physically read in a life time.
> > 
> > Yes, agreed.
> > 
> > > And the documentation doesn't help.  For example, I knew people's rules
> > > about capitalizing the subject but I'd just forget.  I say that if you
> > > can't be bothered to add it to checkpatch then it means you don't really
> > > care that strongly.
> > 
> > If a subsystem requires a certain spelling/capitalization in patch email
> > subjects, it should be added to MAINTAINERS IMO.  E.g.,
> > E:      NuBus
> 
> +1
> 
> Better make this a regex to deal with (net|net-next).
> 
> We could probably script populating MAINTAINERS with this using how it
> is done manually: git log --oneline <dir>

I made a similar proposal nearly a decade ago to add a grammar
to MAINTAINERS sections for patch subject prefixes.

https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1289919077.28741.50.camel@Joe-Laptop/