From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 096E2C04FDF for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2023 17:17:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1345160AbjHPRQn (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Aug 2023 13:16:43 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:49282 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1345168AbjHPRQQ (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Aug 2023 13:16:16 -0400 Received: from mx0a-0031df01.pphosted.com (mx0a-0031df01.pphosted.com [205.220.168.131]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E9BCD2D48; Wed, 16 Aug 2023 10:16:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0279866.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-0031df01.pphosted.com (8.17.1.19/8.17.1.19) with ESMTP id 37GCMFPf026499; Wed, 16 Aug 2023 17:15:41 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=quicinc.com; h=date : from : to : cc : subject : message-id : references : mime-version : content-type : in-reply-to; s=qcppdkim1; bh=zhkaB++sZDMq2yanj4e1JbYu42RN6uvd1pKF9zJHIZo=; b=JMP48rz/0Bzyzxpc1z//LFHnHF6VmQRM8qnKLyz//YLATs0DBCRAHGJxcWrT6zAvvBA1 VGfk5cR5ltG7BnphZtYNl5VsHzHr0raLU8FARTtOrmcHWP2VuMBBZY2oEoXo/A5Q6OtU 7WRJ/fXotoZcOrcP7xCiKc4xFzLeaKcuNi0lcSMlWZzxbod5ngBEjj1gD/TH22Kwk/w4 naGacPbUc4U7HGhRMkWDJJF+eThXAOg/DkNDWudOHrWWV8PWqTQkfT1rnEPH6AdF/0+V LAR8aAl4VGIrf/wuNIn5JqWj4H/K1LtKIvi71AnKiV3MsML4E7c6C1YpIdN9rdv8pcM+ BA== Received: from nasanppmta03.qualcomm.com (i-global254.qualcomm.com [199.106.103.254]) by mx0a-0031df01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3sg83rbd0a-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 16 Aug 2023 17:15:41 +0000 Received: from nasanex01b.na.qualcomm.com (nasanex01b.na.qualcomm.com [10.46.141.250]) by NASANPPMTA03.qualcomm.com (8.17.1.5/8.17.1.5) with ESMTPS id 37GHFeIX002878 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 16 Aug 2023 17:15:40 GMT Received: from quicinc.com (10.80.80.8) by nasanex01b.na.qualcomm.com (10.46.141.250) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1118.36; Wed, 16 Aug 2023 10:15:39 -0700 Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2023 10:15:38 -0700 From: Guru Das Srinagesh To: Krzysztof Kozlowski CC: Masahiro Yamada , Nick Desaulniers , Andrew Morton , "Nicolas Schier" , Kees Cook , "Bjorn Andersson" , , , Will Deacon , "Greg Kroah-Hartman" , , , , , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/1] Add add-maintainer.py script Message-ID: <20230816171538.GB26279@quicinc.com> References: <20230810185526.GC31860@quicinc.com> <4d94d0fd-72d4-0196-3a30-3e1efb9f5aca@linaro.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4d94d0fd-72d4-0196-3a30-3e1efb9f5aca@linaro.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-Originating-IP: [10.80.80.8] X-ClientProxiedBy: nasanex01b.na.qualcomm.com (10.46.141.250) To nasanex01b.na.qualcomm.com (10.46.141.250) X-QCInternal: smtphost X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6200 definitions=5800 signatures=585085 X-Proofpoint-GUID: rlUvw-RXrUOWd5u-0bjWn0IL_MERk8Rr X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: rlUvw-RXrUOWd5u-0bjWn0IL_MERk8Rr X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.267,Aquarius:18.0.957,Hydra:6.0.601,FMLib:17.11.176.26 definitions=2023-08-16_17,2023-08-15_02,2023-05-22_02 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 adultscore=0 mlxlogscore=630 malwarescore=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 bulkscore=0 priorityscore=1501 clxscore=1015 mlxscore=0 phishscore=0 impostorscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2306200000 definitions=main-2308160152 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Thanks for the comments, Krzysztof. On Aug 15 2023 23:06, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 10/08/2023 20:55, Guru Das Srinagesh wrote: > > On Aug 03 2023 01:23, Guru Das Srinagesh wrote: > >> When pushing patches to upstream, the `get_maintainer.pl` script is used to > >> determine whom to send the patches to. Instead of having to manually process > >> the output of the script, add a wrapper script to do that for you. > >> > >> The add-maintainer.py script adds maintainers (and mailing lists) to a patch, > >> editing it in-place. > > > > Could I request reviews from the other maintainers as well, please? Just to see > > if I should continue working on this script or if the `b4` tool obviates the > > need for such a script. > > I send a bit of patches but I use very simple workflow. It is really > simple, so simple, that I was always surprised how people can make their > life difficult with some complicated process to send patches... and then > obviously skip some maintainers, because of that process. Exactly - this script aims to solve precisely that problem. It fills the gap between running `get_maintainers.pl` and having to manually edit its output to add "To: " and "Cc: " and somehow incorporate it in the body of the patch(es). With this script, the workflow would be as simple as: 1. Generate patches using `git format-patch` 2. Run `add-maintainer.py` on the above patches 3. `git send-email` the patches. That's it - no need to manually work with email addresses. > I almost always feed git send-email with addresses from > scripts/get_maintainers.pl. This tool would not bring any benefits to my > simple workflow. In the light of the 3-step workflow I've envisioned above, could you please elaborate why not? If anything, it will only save a developer's time. > For newcomers, OTOH, I would either recommend simple workflow or just > use b4. Why? Because if you cannot use git-send-email, then it means > your email setup will make your life difficult and adding maintainers to > existing patch won't help you. You've mentioned a "simple workflow" many times - could you please share more details on the steps you follow in your workflow for sending patches? > This tool depends on the command line and shell interface of > scripts/get_maintainers.pl which is another reason why it might not be a > good idea. Could you please elaborate on why depending on the output of `get_maintainer.pl` is a bad idea? It's what everyone uses, no? Thank you. Guru Das.