On Sat, 2010-09-25 at 21:53 -0400, Ted Ts'o wrote: > On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 06:32:26PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > > 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. > No, it *is* true. Someone with brains, as supposed to a stupid > script, would know that fs/ext4 should be treated as a unit. And > there *is* a F: fs/ext4 in the MAINTAINERS script. When you define "it" that way, not as any simple file pattern match, but as a control for what "git log -- path" to inspect, it's quite feasible to use the pattern match rather than the file name. So, thanks, that's a good suggestion. > I don't believe get_maintainers.pl does have legitmate use, since it's > really not that hard to look up something in MAINTAINERS, and if it's > not there, some real human judgement is needed, and not hueristic > guessing --- or at the very least, the script needs to warn that it's > guessing, and maybe explain to the user in detail why it's making the > guesses that it's making, so the user has a chance of understanding > why it might be completely wrong. Multiple warning labels on tools tend to get ignored. People that use tools without training tend to get injured. 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
