On 10/11/2023 11:20 AM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 11/10/2023 10:41, Ferruh Yigit: >> On 10/11/2023 9:30 AM, Bruce Richardson wrote: >>> On Wed, Oct 11, 2023 at 10:03:07AM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote: >>>> 11/10/2023 09:30, David Marchand: >>>>> On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 6:26 PM Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> In the contributor guide, it was said that no need to Cc maintainers >>>>>> for new additions, probably for new directories not having a maintainer. >>>>>> There is no harm, and it is a good habit, to always Cc maintainers. >>>>>> >>>>>> Remove this case as it can mislead to not Cc maintainers when needed. >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net> >>>>> >>>>> I agree Cc: maintainers should be the default / recommended way of >>>>> sending patches. >>>>> >>>>> Just to convince myself, adding some meson skeleton for a "plop" >>>>> library, adding an entry in the release notes and hooking in >>>>> lib/meson.build: >>>>> $ git show --stat >>>>> doc/guides/rel_notes/release_23_11.rst | 4 ++++ >>>>> lib/meson.build | 1 + >>>>> lib/plop/meson.build | 2 ++ >>>>> >>>>> $ ./devtools/get-maintainer.sh 0001-new-awesome-library.patch >>>>> >>>>> In this case, it translates to an empty To: list if you follow the >>>>> example command line: >>>>> git send-email --to-cmd ./devtools/get-maintainer.sh --cc >>>>> dev@dpdk.org 000*.patch >>>>> >>>>> We could add a default list of recipients if no maintainer is found by >>>>> the script. >>>>> And the next question is who should be in that list.. >>>> >>>> Or we can send to dev@dpdk.org, Cc maintainers. >>>> This is what I do: >>>> git send-email --to dev@dpdk.org --cc-cmd devtools/get-maintainer.sh >>>> >>> +1 for this, mainly on the basis of it being what I do too! :-) >>> >> >> I am for "--to-cmd=./devtools/get-maintainer.sh --cc dev@dpdk.org" >> >> To highlight response is expected from the maintainers, and community is >> informed. >> >> Also people may have filters to give higher priority to emails they are >> in 'to' list, high priority is what we want from maintainers :) > > They should give high priority when they are Cc as well. > > The problem is that we may have patches with empty "To", > especially for cover letters and new libs. >
There are indeed, for those cases I am putting 'dev' to "To:".
