Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: fix pattern for PC

[Peter Maydell]

On 29 June 2015 at 11:23, Laszlo Ersek <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 06/29/15 12:00, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> On 29 June 2015 at 10:54, Michael S. Tsirkin <address@hidden> wrote:
>>> Looks like hw/i386/ does not work, hw/i386/*
>>> seems to work better.
>>
>> This is kind of vague... The documentation at the top
>> of MAINTAINERS says the difference is that "hw/i386/"
>> means "all files in and below hw/i386/", whereas
>> "hw/i386/*" means "all files in hw/i386, but not below"
>> (so won't match anything in hw/i386/kvm/ or hw/i386/xen/).
>> Is this the effect you're trying to achieve? It would
>> be nice to mention the symptoms of the problem this patch
>> is fixing in the commit message...
>
> Assume I format the patch series:
>
>   http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2015-06/msg06677.html
>
> into a single file, with
>
>   git format-patch --notes --cover-letter --numbered --stdout
>
> and then run scripts/get_maintainer.pl on the resultant patch series file.
>
> Before this patch, I get:
>
>   Paolo Bonzini <address@hidden> (maintainer:X86)
>   Richard Henderson <address@hidden> (maintainer:X86)
>   Eduardo Habkost <address@hidden> (maintainer:X86)
>   "Michael S. Tsirkin" <address@hidden> (supporter:PC)
>
> Since Michael was listed at the bottom of that list, I didn't CC him. (I
> wanted to give him a breather after my many PXB iterations.)
>
> Turns out that wasn't a good choice. With this patch for MAINTAINERS in
> place, the script reports Michael at the top:
>
>   "Michael S. Tsirkin" <address@hidden> (supporter:PC)
>   Paolo Bonzini <address@hidden> (maintainer:X86)
>   Richard Henderson <address@hidden> (maintainer:X86)
>   Eduardo Habkost <address@hidden> (maintainer:X86)
>
> Maybe I should have considered something else than just the ordering of
> the names in the list, not sure...
>
> Hm, yes, this is at least partly (if not fully) my fault. MAINTAINERS says
>
>         S: Status, one of the following:
>            Supported:   Someone is actually paid to look after this.
>            Maintained:  Someone actually looks after it.
>
> I didn't realize this distinction, and I also didn't realize that
> "supporter" and "maintainer" were derived directly from "Supported" and
> "Maintained".
>
> It would be helpful if developers with more jurisdiction (according to
> the Supported / Maintained / Odd Fixes classification) were listed
> higher in the output.

Mmm. If this is what we're trying to fix then messing with
our MAINTAINERS file seems like the wrong thing.

Personally I think that the best approach would be just to
cc everybody that get_maintainers.pl says is a maintainer
or supporter; they're in the file because they *want* this
email, after all... If your patchset touches two areas then
that doesn't mean it's OK to drop a 'maintainer' email for
area 2 just because area 1 happens to have two or three
'supporter' emails listed.

thanks
-- PMM