On Wed, 4 Mar 2020, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > Em Wed, 4 Mar 2020 13:10:35 -0700 > Jonathan Corbet <corbet@xxxxxxx> escreveu: > > > > > Sigh, I need to work a MAINTAINERS check into my workflow... > > > > Thanks for fixing these, but ... what tree did you generate the patch > > against? I doesn't come close to applying to docs-next. > > I'm starting to suspect that maybe the best workflow would be to just > apply the patches at docs-next keeping links broken, and then run > ./scripts/documentation-file-ref-check --fix by the end of a merge > window, addressing such breakages. > > There are usually lots of churn outside the merge window. > Agree, it is probably the simplest solution to get such things fixed at the end of the merge window; there are many of such 'automatic' fixes (and scripts that generate them). It just needs somebody to convince Linus to have a trusted end-of-merge-window clean-up team to provide a final pull request on Sunday afternoon to fix all those minor points. > Another alternative would be to split the MAINTAINERS file on a > per-subsystem basis. If I remember well, someone proposed this once at > LKML. I vaguely remember that there were even a patch (or RFC) > adding support for such thing for get_maintainers.pl. > I would also support that idea. In the meantime, I am looking into the effort to identify and fix these issues when they are submitted to the mailing list. It is not the simplest solution, but at least a solution that I can try to work on individually at first. Lukas
