On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 09:27:29 -0700 Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Oct 01, 2019 at 08:31:47AM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > > On a separate note...it occurred to me, rather belatedly as usual, that > > last time we discussed doing this that there was some opposition to adding > > a second MAINTAINERS parser to the kernel; future changes to the format of > > that file may force both to be adjusted, and somebody will invariably > > forget one. Addressing that, if we feel a need to do so, probably requires > > tweaking get_maintainer.pl to output the information in a useful format. > > That's a reasonable point, but I would make two observations: > > - get_maintainers.pl is written in Perl and I really don't want to write > more Perl. ;) Trust me, I get it! > - the parsing methods in get_maintainers is much more focused on the > file/pattern matching and is blind to the structure of the rest > of the document (it only examines '^[A-Z]:' and blank lines), and > does so "on demand", in that it hunts through the entire MAINTAINERS > file contents for each path match. > > So I don't think it's suitable to merge functionality here... Makes sense to me. If anybody out there objects, speak now ... jon
