On Sun, Jun 04, 2023 at 11:26:44AM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Sat, 3 Jun 2023 18:06:59 +0200 Willy Tarreau wrote: > > > I think that is going overboard (too far). As long as a maintainer > > > is a direct recipient of the email (patch), that should be sufficient. > > > > Or it could be simplified, saying that all those who are expected to > > play a role on the patchset (review, test, merge etc) should be in the > > 'To' field while those who might possibly be interested in having a > > look are in 'Cc' (lists, other people having expressed interest in the > > patchset, single-time contributors to the file being changed etc). It > > could be hinted that usually people read mails sent to them faster than > > those they're CCed. This implies that maintainers have to be in To and > > lists in Cc. > > It's useful when maintainer (or group thereof) who are expected to apply > the patch are in the To: > Who applies the patch is not information a noob may know but it may be > worth writing down as best practice? Note that some maintainers process pull requests from patchwork, not from their mailbox, and prefer not to be aadressed in the To or CC headers. I don't know how widespread that is. If I recall correctly, this was something that maintainer profiles (maintainer-entry-profile.rst files in Documentation) were supposed to address. -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart
