Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 2 Jun 2014 18:51:33 -0700 | From | Josh Triplett <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH RFC 2/2] rcu: Add Josh Triplett as designated reviewer |
| |
On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 06:07:18PM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote: > On 06/02/2014 05:02 PM, josh@joshtriplett.org wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 01:38:56PM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote: > >> On 06/02/2014 01:36 PM, Joe Perches wrote: > >>> On Mon, 2014-06-02 at 13:35 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > >>>> On Mon, 2 Jun 2014 10:00:20 -0700 "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> --- a/MAINTAINERS > >>>>> +++ b/MAINTAINERS > >>>>> @@ -7321,6 +7321,7 @@ F: kernel/rcu/torture.c > >>>>> > >>>>> RCUTORTURE TEST FRAMEWORK > >>>>> M: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > >>>>> +R: Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org> > >>>>> L: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > >>>>> S: Supported > >>>>> T: git git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/paulmck/linux-rcu.git > >>>> > >>>> I like the general principle - knowing who to poke regarding a kernel > >>>> change is useful. > >>>> > >>>> I don't care much whether it's "M:" or "R:", although "R:" carries more > >>>> meaning and hence is probably better. > >>>> > >>>> But why not "Cc:"? That's meaningful too and is more copy-n-paste friendly. > >> > >> Josh, what are you assuming that Andrew and I did not? > > > > Not sure what you mean here. Responding to the text you quoted: I have > > no particular need to bikeshed the tag name, so if you prefer "Cc" and > > can convince get_maintainer.pl to handle it, fine by me. > > Sorry, what I meant is that Andrew and I both mentioned copy-paste and > you replied earlier (and I have already deleted it) that copy-paste shouldn't > be necessary for someone who is using get_maintainer.pl. > > Do you redirect its output to your patch file and then edit it or does > get_maintainer.pl work with git-send-email or something else? if something > else, what is it, please?
Oh, I see; that was in text you hadn't quoted, so I didn't know what you were asking. :)
git send-email can invoke 'scripts/get_maintainer.pl --no-rolestats' directly via --to-cmd or -cc-cmd; that works fine as long as you don't have a cover letter.
Depending on the system I'm running on, and whether it's more convenient to invoke git-send-email or to edit patch mails and send them with 'mutt -H', I have a shell pipeline which invokes get_maintainer.pl on an entire patch series, collects all the email addresses it returns, and inserts them all into each mail as CCs. (That way, when I send a cross-subsystem patch series, I don't get a pile of maintainers confused that they only received a couple of the numbered patches.) One example:
{ echo -n "To: " ; for x in *.patch ; do scripts/get_maintainer.pl --no-rolestats < $x | fgrep -v josh@joshtriplett.org ; done | sort -u | sed 's/$/, /;$s/, $//' | tr -d '\n' ; echo ; } | sed -i '/^From:/r/dev/stdin'
Personally, I'd find it handy if one of the following happened:
- git send-email (and ideally also git format-patch) grew an option to collect *all* the to-cmd and cc-cmd output from each patch and apply it to every patch (including the cover letter).
- get_maintainer.pl accepted multiple patchfile names and output the union of the results. Ideally, get_maintainer.pl would also have a -i option to edit the patch files and insert the addresses in the mail headers.
| |