On Sat, 2010-09-25 at 21:04 -0400, Ted Ts'o wrote: > But the stupid thing is > trying to do it on a file-by-file basis in the first place, when for > something like fs/ext4, it really should be done on a subdirectory > basis. That's not true at all. If there's a listed maintainer linked to a pattern like "F: fs/ext4/", then all files in that directory and any subdirectories are "maintained". If a maintainer wants to "exclude" particular files, or subdirectories, that's possible with the "X:" tag. > What really annoys me is newbies who use checkpatch.pl in its --file > mode, and then assume that every single warning is a deadly bug that > much be patched. Perhaps checkpatch.pl should print some "don't submit patches for stupid stuff" when used with -f. > I at least never use it. Nor are you required to. Tool use is optional. I don't care if you carve patches with a mallet onto stone tablets and send them by swarms of carrier pigeon to Linus so can reuse the stone to build an actual castle. cheers, Joe -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
