On 19/08/2023 03:33, Guru Das Srinagesh wrote: > On Aug 18 2023 10:43, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>> For newcomers, OTOH, I would either recommend simple workflow or just >>>> use b4. Why? Because if you cannot use git-send-email, then it means >>>> your email setup will make your life difficult and adding maintainers to >>>> existing patch won't help you. >>> >>> You've mentioned a "simple workflow" many times - could you please share more >>> details on the steps you follow in your workflow for sending patches? >> >> I shared it on LKML few times already (and Rob's git send-email identity >> is also on LKML), so one more time: >> >> https://github.com/krzk/tools/blob/master/linux/.bash_aliases_linux#L91 > > Thank you for sharing this - it is really neat indeed and you certainly don't > need a step #2 with this method. > > However, I see areas for improvement in the alias: > - Subsystem-specific mailing lists, maintainers, reviewers, and other roles are > all marked as "To: " sans distinction via the alias whereas > `add-maintainer.py` and `b4` both provide marking of lists as "Cc: " which > seems aesthetically and semantically more pleasing. To or Cc does not matter. > - Only `add-maintainer.py` allows for maintainers to be selectively in "To: " > and "Cc: " for patches in a series depending on whether they are the > maintainers for that particular patch or not. It's intentional to CC everyone. If I wanted to Cc/To maintainer-per-patch, I would use Rob's send-email identity. > >>>> This tool depends on the command line and shell interface of >>>> scripts/get_maintainers.pl which is another reason why it might not be a >>>> good idea. >>> >>> Could you please elaborate on why depending on the output of >>> `get_maintainer.pl` is a bad idea? It's what everyone uses, no? >> >> No, because if interface changes you need to update two tools. > > But `b4 prep --auto-to-cc` also uses `get_maintainer.pl`! Yep, and it's Konstantin's headache to keep it updated. :) > > Also, in your previous email you said to "just use b4", which also depends on > the command line and shell interface of `get_maintainers.pl`. Depending on > `get_maintainer.pl` is therefore perfectly okay - there is no need to reinvent > it or disregard it for whatever reasons. True, it is okay, but adding more tools to depend on it is more work. b4 is awesome tool, thus I feel it is justified to depend on that interface. I don't see the need for more tools doing exactly the same. Best regards, Krzysztof
