> On Nov 8, 2021, at 4:37 PM, Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, 2021-11-08 at 16:22 -0800, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote: > > So it's an exploder not an actual maintainer and it likely isn't > publically archived with any normal list mechanism. > > So IMO "private" isn't appropriate. Neither is "L:" > Perhaps just mark it as what it is as an "exploder". > > Or maybe these blocks should be similar to: > > M: Name of Lead Developer <somebody@xxxxxxxxxx> > M: VMware <foo> maintainers <linux-<foo>-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > Maybe something like a comment mechanism should be added to the > MAINTAINERS file. > > Maybe # > > so this entry could be something like: > > M: VMware <foo> maintainers <linux-<foo>-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxxx> # VMware's ever changing internal maintainers list Admittedly, I do not care much about how it turns to be. But if it is modified, it should be very clear who the maintainer is, and not to entangle the mailing list and the maintainer. I am personally not subscribed to the internal pv-drivers mailing list, which is not just for memory ballooning, and is also listed as a maintainer for vmmouse, pvscsi, vmxnet3 and others. As I am the only maintainer of VMware balloon, if someone is mistaken and sends an email only to the mailing list and not me, he might be disappointed.
