Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: make linux-mediatek list remarks consistent

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




On Mon, 14 Sep 2020, David Woodhouse wrote:

> On Mon, 2020-09-14 at 16:57 +0200, Lukas Bulwahn wrote:
> > Well, I am happy to send any PATCH v2. I guess we, you, David, Matthias 
> > and I, now just need to determine if the list is moderated or not.
> 
> It really isn't.
> 
>  # /usr/lib/mailman/bin/config_list -o- linux-mediatek | grep -B5 ^generic_nonmember_action
> # legal values are:
> #    0 = "Accept"
> #    1 = "Hold"
> #    2 = "Reject"
> #    3 = "Discard"
> generic_nonmember_action = 0
> 

David, I guess if you have access to the ground truth on 
lists.infradead.org, maybe you can dump the actual setting for all those 
lists?

$ grep "lists.infradead.org" MAINTAINERS | sort | uniq

L:	ath10k@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
L:	ath11k@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
L:	b43-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
L:	kexec@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
L:	libertas-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
L:	linux-afs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
L:	linux-amlogic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
L:	linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
L:	linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (moderated for non-subscribers)
L:	linux-geode@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (moderated for non-subscribers)
L:	linux-i3c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (moderated for non-subscribers)
L:	linux-mediatek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
L:	linux-mediatek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (moderated for non-subscribers)
L:	linux-mtd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
L:	linux-nvme@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
L:	linux-parport@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (subscribers-only)
L:	linux-realtek-soc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (moderated for non-subscribers)
L:	linux-riscv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
L:	linux-rockchip@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
L:	linux-rpi-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (moderated for non-subscribers)
L:	linux-snps-arc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
L:	linux-um@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
L:	linux-unisoc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (moderated for non-subscribers)
L:	wcn36xx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


They are all reporting different settings and linux-mediatek and 
linux-arm-kernel even inconsistently. The inconsistency and a poor attempt 
to resolve that is what started this discussion.

I can then send out the patch to adjust MAINTAINERS to your ground truth 
from the server.

Thanks for your support,

Lukas



[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Development]     [Kernel Announce]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Linux Networking Development]     [Share Photos]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux