Re: [RFC] is it time to split up the MAINTAINERS file?

[Rob Landley <rob@landley.net>]

On 06/11/2013 02:13:45 AM, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-06-10 at 23:49 -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
> > You could either have the same entry in more than one MAINTAINERS  
> file
> > or keep it at a higher level. (This wouldn't eliminate the top level
> > MAINTAINERS, merely trim it down a bit.)
> >
> > Just throwing it out there. Seems like it might be a thing, someday
> > anyway...
> 
> Patches talk...

So you suggest sending a patch series to break out arch directories and  
go "here, a whole new task for you the architecture maintainer to take  
on!" and that's the _polite_ way to ask whether or not it's a good idea?

> or add an initial / for the absolutes
> 
> F:	*/			(everything at this directory and lower)
> F:	foo.c			(single file)
> F:	/Documentation/foo.txt	(absolute single file)

That one, obviously. (Optimize for the common case.)

> make could be taught to create an overall integrated
> MAINTAINERS, which would not be part of the files
> managed by git/cvs from these submaintainer files.

Why? (What's the point? Does it make finding who is in charge of $THING  
easier?)

> Still, I think the "best" approach would be to enhance
> git to manage this additional information instead.

Oh please no.

> Something akin to:
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2007/8/14/256

I'm sorry I brought it up.

> Maybe some standardization of "git notes" or
> "git annotate" might work.

The horror! The horror!

> A script could be written to create something like the
> existing MAINTAINERS file from that too.

I won't mention it again.

*shudder*

Rob