From: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND v4] MAINTAINERS: fix lots of alphabetic ordering
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 00:36:07 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170720043607.e3xhccrxgdap4xbq@thunk.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFx1fe1yBj1-ioEPtkMAvFSvs8PhzM3w8NpbM7P3KeZdsg@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 09:24:13PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> So I don't mind the idea of just making MAINTAINERS a directory, but I
> don't think we want to so far as to make one file per entry. That's
> what, 1500+ files tiny files or so? Seems a bit excessive.
>
> Maybe we can just do the prefix thing and just do 26 files A-Z
> instead? Or maybe go by first word (so all the ARM things would go in
> one place?)
Is that really going to help with merge conflicts? It might help keep
things more in order, but if there is a merge conflict caused by two
changes to adjacent entries causing patch "fuzz", splitting things
into 26 files A-Z isn't going to significantly decrease the odds of
this happening.
It would seem to me that keeping a single file, and if we have a
program which sanity checks changes to the Maintainers format (warns
of missing required fields or unknown fields, or entries inserted out
of order, etc.) perhaps that would accomplish most of what we are looking for?
Or we could do something really hacky, like add "\n----\n" between
each entry to avoid merge conflicts caused by adjacent changes or
adjacent inserts? But that's an idea that is probably too ugly to live...
- Ted
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-07-20 4:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-07-19 21:40 Randy Dunlap
2017-07-19 21:44 ` Andrew Morton
2017-07-20 0:08 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-07-20 0:18 ` Randy Dunlap
2017-07-20 0:18 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-07-20 0:19 ` Randy Dunlap
2017-07-20 0:26 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-07-20 0:35 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-07-20 0:53 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-07-20 1:04 ` Randy Dunlap
2017-07-20 1:05 ` Joe Perches
2017-07-20 3:12 ` Joe Perches
2017-07-20 4:24 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-07-20 4:36 ` Theodore Ts'o [this message]
2017-07-20 4:53 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-07-20 4:43 ` Joe Perches
2017-07-20 4:57 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-07-20 10:54 ` Michael Ellerman
2017-07-20 16:48 ` Joe Perches
2017-07-20 18:03 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-07-20 22:50 ` Joe Perches
2017-07-19 21:49 ` Joe Perches
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20170720043607.e3xhccrxgdap4xbq@thunk.org \
--to=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=joe@perches.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rdunlap@infradead.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®