Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] scripts: Add add-maintainer.py

[Jani Nikula]

On Mon, 28 Aug 2023, Bjorn Andersson <quic_bjorande@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 28, 2023 at 05:23:58PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 28/08/2023 17:14, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>> > On 8/28/23 15:48, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> >> Hi Bjorn,
>> >>
>> >> On Mon, Aug 28, 2023 at 3:37 PM Bjorn Andersson
>> >> <quic_bjorande@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >>> On Mon, Aug 28, 2023 at 11:14:41AM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote:
>> >>>> On Sat, 26 Aug 2023, Guru Das Srinagesh <quic_gurus@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >>>>> This script runs get_maintainer.py on a given patch file (or multiple
>> >>>>> patch files) and adds its output to the patch file in place with the
>> >>>>> appropriate email headers "To: " or "Cc: " as the case may be. These new
>> >>>>> headers are added after the "From: " line in the patch.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> FWIW, I personally prefer tooling to operate on git branches and commits
>> >>>> than patches. For me, the patches are just an intermediate step in
>> >>>> getting the commits from my git branch to the mailing list. That's not
>> >>>> where I add the Cc's, but rather in the commits in my local branch,
>> >>>> where they're preserved. YMMV.
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>> May I ask how you add/carry the recipients in a commit?
>> >>
>> >> I guess below a "---" line in the commit description?
>> > 
>> > Does that do anything special in commit log? I'd expect (and I do it that
>> > way) it's rather just adding a
>> 
>> It does. It goes away.
>
> Afaict, it's verbatim copied into the .patch, which would mean that it
> goes away when the patch is applied on the other side.
>
> But it's still going to be in the email (followed by another ---), so
> unless there's another step later in the process that cleans this up I
> it looks ugly, and not very useful - unless I'm missing something.
>
>> > 
>> > Cc: Name <email>
>> > 
>> > in the tag area where s-o-b, reviewed-by etc are added.
>> 
>> Why storing autogenerated scripts/get_maintainer.pl CC-entries in commit
>> msg? The non-maintainer-output but the automated output? There is no
>> single need to store automated output of get_maintainers.pl in the git
>> log. It can be easily re-created at any given time, thus its presence in
>> the git history is redundant and obfuscates the log.
>> 
>
> Fully agree to this. In particular if the patch is going to be sent as
> part of a series the recipients list won't be accurate for any patch.
>
> The case I was looking for was the case where I want to make sure to
> include a specific person, beyond the get_maintainers output. So pretty
> much the usual Cc: tag in the commit message, but I don't necessarily
> want to write this fact into the git history.

The point is, I *never* use get_maintainer.pl output as-is.

BR,
Jani.


-- 
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center