Hi Dave & Maxime,
On 10/10/24 04:36, Maxime Ripard wrote:
On Wed, Oct 09, 2024 at 04:13:01PM GMT, Dave Stevenson wrote:
Hi Maíra
On Wed, 9 Oct 2024 at 15:12, Maíra Canal <mcanal@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
VC4 has two relevant mailing list: kernel-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx. Therefore, list those two mailing
lists in the VC4 section.
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx is automatically picked up by
get_maintainer.pl due to vc4 living under /drivers/gpu/drm. Likewise
the DT bindings are covered. AIUI that means we don't need to list it
explicitly.
Actually, Raspberry Pi Kernel Maintenance <kernel-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
was already listed in the VC4 section, but it was listed as a reviewer.
List it as a mailing list.
I had this debate with Maxime in v1 when I added this [1].
I agree with the point that Maxime brought in [1]. Usually, "maintainers
(and reviewers) should be explicit."
For me, it is hard to understand why a list would be listed as a
maintainer or reviewer, as from my PoV, all lists are used to gather
review.
It's not an open list as most L: entries are. The top of MAINTAINERS
By grepping lists in the MAINTAINERS file, we can see that not only
open-lists are listed there. There are also moderated lists.
lists as "L: *Mailing list* that is relevant to this area". That
mailing list is dri-devel.
You also get "Broadcom internal kernel review list
<bcm-kernel-feedback-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx>" listed as R: in various
MAINTAINERS entries.
I don't know the definitive answer here, but it seemed to fit reasonably as R:.
Yeah, I told you last time, it's going to be a recurring discussion
because it's super unusual :)
I don't have an issue in keeping it the way it is. But I agree that it's
unusual.
Best Regards,
- Maíra
Maxime
