Re: [Ksummit-2010-discuss] [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: add U: for URL of todo list, add RCU todo list

[Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>]

On Thu, 26 Aug 2010 09:29:23 -0700
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xenotime.net> wrote:

> On Thu, 26 Aug 2010 11:25:33 -0500 James Bottomley wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 2010-08-26 at 09:14 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 08:51:44AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 2010-08-26 at 08:45 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > > Since T: and L: are already taken, add U: for URL of todo
> > > > > list. Also add the RCU todo list to both the RCU and
> > > > > RCUTORTURE projects.
> > > > 
> > > > Hi Paul
> > > > 
> > > > I think W: already works perfectly well for this use.
> > > > 
> > > > >From MAINTAINERS:
> > > >         W: Web-page with status/info
> > > > 
> > > > > @@ -4801,6 +4802,7 @@ M:	Josh Triplett
> > > > > <josh@freedesktop.org> M:	"Paul E. McKenney"
> > > > > <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> S:	Supported
> > > > >  T:
> > > > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/paulmck/linux-2.6-rcu.git
> > > > > +U:
> > > > > http://kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/paulmck/rcutodo.html
> > > > 
> > > > W:
> > > > http://kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/paulmck/rcutodo.html
> > > > 
> > > > >  F:	Documentation/RCU/torture.txt
> > > > >  F:	kernel/rcutorture.c
> > > > >  
> > > > > @@ -4826,6 +4828,7 @@ M:	"Paul E. McKenney"
> > > > > <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> W:
> > > > > http://www.rdrop.com/users/paulmck/rclock/ S:	Supported
> > > > >  T:
> > > > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/paulmck/linux-2.6-rcu.git
> > > > > +U:
> > > > > http://kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/paulmck/rcutodo.html
> > > > 
> > > > W:
> > > > http://kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/paulmck/rcutodo.html
> > > 
> > > OK, how about the following, then?
> > 
> > Got to say I really think overloading W which means web page/status
> > information isn't a very good idea:
> > 
> > jejb@mulgrave:~/git/linux-2.6> grep -w 'W:' MAINTAINERS |wc -l
> > 371
> > 
> > We already have ~400 of them ... how's anyone looking for a todo
> > list going to find the right one in amongst all the others
> > (assuming a newbie with no subject predisposition simply trying to
> > find any todo list).
> 
> 
> Did you have an alternate suggestion?
> 
> Do you prefer a Grand Unified Todo List?
> 


I have to say that I'm not yet convinced that keeping a todo list in a
place that's not with the actual source code does not give me warm
fuzzy feelings. Every time we've kept information about the source code
separate from our source code it's been a failure; it gets out of sync
fast and it just adds to the maintenance.

A git commit that both fixes an issue and removed the line from the
todo file (or moves it to a "done" section, whatever) is the ultimate
goal obviously... having a U: seems to go in exactly the opposite
direction.

otoh having a kernel-doc type (eg structured, parsable) way of
gathering todo items throughout the tree.... that I can see as useful.