On Mon, 2016-04-11 at 23:25 +0100, Wols Lists wrote: > On 11/04/16 22:08, Joe Perches wrote: > > > > I'm a native English speaker and I think that's a not > > a good argument. > > > > Having the same entry for M: and L: where M: isn't an > > actual person is not a great idea. > > > > The list is not a maintainer. > > > > > Depends on your definition of maintainer ... > > To me, it means "should be notified of anything maintenance-related". I think that's not a particularly good definition. MAINTAINERS describes the M: entry as: M: Mail patches to: FullName <address@domain> That _person_ is generally responsible for vetting patches and bug fixing. > By that definition the list is a maintainer. Not given there's a specific L: entry that's described L: Mailing list that is relevant to this area > And what do you do if you > don't have a person designated as maintainer? Then you don't have a maintainer > Do you send everything to /dev/null? Patches are sent to lkml. > A list is for general discussion, advice, whatever. Those two > definitions are not mutually exclusive, and therefore the list email > address may need to be identified as both/and, hence the two entries. disagree. cheers, Joe -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
