From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755574AbaAVNCg (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Jan 2014 08:02:36 -0500 Received: from smtprelay0058.hostedemail.com ([216.40.44.58]:45696 "EHLO smtprelay.hostedemail.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755153AbaAVNC2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Jan 2014 08:02:28 -0500 X-Session-Marker: 6A6F6540706572636865732E636F6D X-Spam-Summary: 2,0,0,,d41d8cd98f00b204,joe@perches.com,:::::::::::::::::::::,RULES_HIT:41:355:379:541:599:800:960:973:988:989:1260:1261:1277:1311:1313:1314:1345:1359:1373:1437:1515:1516:1518:1534:1541:1593:1594:1711:1730:1747:1777:1792:2110:2393:2559:2562:2693:2828:3138:3139:3140:3141:3142:3353:3622:3865:3866:3867:3868:3870:3871:3872:3873:3874:4321:5007:6117:6119:6248:6691:7652:7903:7974:8527:10004:10400:10848:11232:11658:11914:12114:12517:12519:12679:12740:13069:13160:13161:13163:13229:13255:13311:13357,0,RBL:none,CacheIP:none,Bayesian:0.5,0.5,0. X-HE-Tag: work04_6c756c772df3c X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 2288 Message-ID: <1390395744.31946.45.camel@joe-AO722> Subject: Re: [tip:core/urgent] MAINTAINERS: Restore "L: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" entries From: Joe Perches To: Ingo Molnar Cc: hpa@zytor.com, alan@linux.intel.com, acme@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, peterz@infradead.org, paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, tglx@linutronix.de, linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 05:02:24 -0800 In-Reply-To: <20140122122728.GA8882@gmail.com> References: <1390325069.2472.78.camel@joe-AO722> <20140122122728.GA8882@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.8.4-0ubuntu1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2014-01-22 at 13:27 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Joe Perches wrote: [] > You have cut out my main argument from you reply and have ignored it: Not ignored. Threaded email works fine. Your main argument is that some people don't cc lkml because section entries don't specify it explicitly. My main argument, which you elided, is that some people will not cc lkml because they will see some sections with L: entries with lkml and others without, and will therefore _not_ cc lkml instead. So I think the rule should be either every section has an lkml entry or no section does. Pick one. Mixing styles just causes a different type of error. > Which is not a very honest way to conduct discussions :-( [] > > MAINTAINERS already says: > > That's irrelevant really, reality tells us that good people are > looking at the entries and are using them as-is. For such things > technology should adapt to people, not the other way around. If you are going to complain about "honesty in argumentation", try it yourself. Be an exemplar. Describing a previous change as being made for intuitions sake when it wasn't, isn't. cheers, Joe