On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 03:46:30PM +0900, Justin Stitt wrote: > On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 3:14 PM Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 03:19:16AM +0000, Justin Stitt wrote: > > > Note that folks really shouldn't be using get_maintainer on tree files > > > anyways [1]. > > > > That's not true, Linus and I use it on a daily basis this way, it's part > > of our normal workflow, AND the workflow of the kernel security team. > > > > So please don't take that valid use-case away from us. > > Fair. I'm on the side of keeping the "K:'' behavior the way it is and > that's why I'm proposing adding "D:" to provide a more granular > content matching type operating strictly on patches. It's purely > opt-in. > > The patch I linked mentioned steering folks away from using > tree files but not necessarily removing the behavior. Please don't steer folks away from it, it is a valid use case of the tool, and I would argue, one of the most important ones given how often I use it that way. Hence my objection to this verbage in the changelog, it's not correct. thanks, greg k-h
