From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933781AbdGTASY (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Jul 2017 20:18:24 -0400 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([65.50.211.133]:41647 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932791AbdGTASX (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Jul 2017 20:18:23 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND v4] MAINTAINERS: fix lots of alphabetic ordering To: Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton Cc: LKML , Joe Perches References: <20170719144457.8b1b6556fc7883ac7bc2b2b0@linux-foundation.org> From: Randy Dunlap Message-ID: Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2017 17:18:22 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 07/19/2017 05:08 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 2:44 PM, Andrew Morton > wrote: >> >> Linus, can you please grab this? > > Ugh. It doesn't apply cleanly. Probably for some really small stupid reason. > > I can easily just look at the reject and fix it, but I don't really > want to. Why? Because I hate the MAINTAINERS file. > > It's the most painful file for merging too, because everybody touches > it - kind of like the old "one single Kconfig file" was back in the > bad old days. > > For example, just during this merge window: > > $ git rev-list --count --no-merges v4.12.. MAINTAINERS > 112 > > and while most of them obviously didn't cause any conflicts (there > were four this cycle), it's still my least favourite "stupid work". > That file pretty consistently gets 100+ changes to it: > > v4.1: 87 > v4.2: 109 > v4.3: 94 > v4.4: 91 > v4.5: 118 > v4.6: 98 > v4.7: 112 > v4.8: 121 > v4.9: 128 > v4.10: 135 > v4.11: 78 > v4.12: 127 > > So I'm wondering if > > (a) we could add a script to do the alphabetical ordering properly. Yeah, I have already thought about that one. I may get around tuit one day. Or maybe Joe could/would. > (b) we could split this thing up some sane way. makes sense. > Anybody got any ideas? (c) funnel all changes thru Andrew (but really foo should be able to make changes to her MAINTAINERS entry) > I'm throwing out _one_ idea: split it up by the main F: line, so that > maintainership information ends up being hierarchical like the Kconfig > files. Teach "get_maintainer.pl" to just do "find . -name > MAINTAINERS" instead? > > I'm not saying that's a great idea (quite often the "main F: line" > might be ambiguous), but it's the most obvious one. > > This is not a _huge_ problem, but it has been a slight annoyance for a > long time now. So it would be good to maybe at least discuss it a bit. -- ~Randy