| 
    
 [Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] [545/2many] MAINTAINERS - XEN HYPERVISOR INTERFACE
 On Mon, Aug 13, 2007 at 12:19:38PM -0700, Chris Wright wrote:
> * Randy Dunlap (randy.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx) wrote:
> > On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 11:55:36 -0700 Chris Wright wrote:
> > > * joe@xxxxxxxxxxx (joe@xxxxxxxxxxx) wrote:
> > > > +F:     arch/i386/xen/
> > > > +F:     drivers/*/xen-*front.c
> > > > +F:     drivers/xen/
> > > > +F:     include/asm-i386/xen/
> > > > +F:     include/xen/
> > > 
> > > I think this data will easily become stale.  What is the point again?
> > 
> > Agreed.  But not everyone wants to or should have to use git,
> > so what are the alternatives?
> 
> Between git (or gitweb), existing MAINTAINERS and a bit of common
> sense (or extra sleuthing), I never perceived a significant problem.
For active kernel developers like you and me it's not a problem.
But for other people it's non-trivial to always figure out who the 
maintainer of some part of the kernel is.
> Alternative could be to place info directly in source files.  If not
> all of MAINTAINERS info, it could be a tag to reference the relevant
> MAINTAINERS entry.
Having the information in MAINTAINERS is what creates the least 
redundancies.
> thanks,
> -chris
cu
Adrian
-- 
       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
 
  | 
  
![]()  | 
            
         Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our  |