On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 1:30 PM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, 27 Jun 2022 12:57:21 -0700 Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > > And that's a good thing. > > My concern is that folks will rebel against populating the CC list if > they never receive feedback from the CCed. I often have to go and > manually trim the CC list because I don't think Jiri, KP, Yonghong etc. > care about my random TLS patch, or removal of a driver which happens > to contain the letters "bpf". but they might! Trimming the cc list doesn't help anything. We used to trim cc list only because of silly vger anti-spam feature which is dropping emails with long cc. Since vger is broken anyway we should be increasing cc where we can. > I was hoping the delegation you're > performing could help with the large Cc list. Would you perhaps > consider moving the K/N regexes to the "Core" entry? It'd lower > the pain of false positives. sure. but I'd rather address the misconception that long cc list is somehow bad. It's good! > > > vger continues to cause trouble and it doesn't sound that the fix is coming. > > So having everyone directly cc-ed is the only option we have. > > Yeah, Exhibit A - vger is lagging right now... > I guess the "real fix" is on the vger, trying to massage MAINTAINERS > now is not a great use of time.. The real fix is to move away from vger and adjust get_maintainer script to be smarter when the mailer can do its job. MAINTAINERS file should list everyone who performs code reviews and maintains the code.
