Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 15 Jan 2007 21:05:13 +0100 | From | Matthias Schniedermeyer <> | Subject | Re: [RFC] How to (automatically) find the correct maintainer(s) |
| |
Richard Knutsson wrote: > Stefan Richter wrote: > >> On 15 Jan, Matthias Schniedermeyer wrote: >> >> >>> Stefan Richter wrote: >>> >>> >>>> On 14 Jan, Richard Knutsson wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> (Really liked the idea to have a "Maintainer"-button next to "Help" >>>>> in *config) >>>>> >>>> >>>> Rhetorical question: What will this button be used for? >>>> >>> >>> Having "all(tm)" information of something in one place? >>> >> >> >> Or, "click here to say 'it does not work'"? >> >> My rhetorical question wasn't about what it is intended for, but what >> people would think it was intended for if it was there. >> >> > > I think it could be practical to have an easy access to whom is > responsible for a driver and which mailinglist its development is > addressed to, both for people interested in helping develop the driver > and those who got an error (or fan-mail :). > >>> I think adding the Maintainers-data is more or less a logical next step. >>> >>> It's not always clear from the MAINTAINERS-file who is the right person >>> for what. Especially as it is a rather large text-file with only >>> mediocre search-friendlieness. It's a 3.5 K-lines file! >>> >>> So when you know that you have a problem with drivers X, wouldn't it be >>> great if you could just "go to" the driver in *config and see not only >>> the Help-Text but the Maintainers-Data also. >>> >> >> >> Seems more like what you actually want to have there is links to users' >> mailinglists or forums. >> >> When this thread started, it was about assisting authors in submitting >> patches. >> >> > > Yes, this is a bit out of scope, but just realized a simple way to > implement it if using the CONFIG_FLAG-approach, just "grep" after the > flag, under which the user hit the "Maintainer"-button, in the > MAINTAINER-file. Also, I think this solves the handler-problem since an > entry can have multiple CONFIG_FLAG's stated. > > I don't think we should add the maintainer-entries directly in Kconfig, > as you Stefan stated, because it is for configure the kernel. With the > above approach, it will just require minor fixes in the "make *config" > to handle it.
But how do you suppose the user gets the CONFIG_-String, which the user then could for searching?
I'd say only a small percentage of hardcore-users would use the .config-file directly, the others would deviate over *config, so i'd say if the MAINTAINERS-data is integrated into Kconfig it's the perfect(tm) 90% solution.
OTOH you could just teach the *config to lookup a MAINTAINERS-entry when all they are properly flagged.
Bis denn
-- Real Programmers consider "what you see is what you get" to be just as bad a concept in Text Editors as it is in women. No, the Real Programmer wants a "you asked for it, you got it" text editor -- complicated, cryptic, powerful, unforgiving, dangerous.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |