On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 08:41:43AM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote: > On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 15:54:26 +0200 Adrian Bunk wrote: > > > On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 12:41:41PM +0200, Rene Herman wrote: > > > On 04/26/2007 03:18 AM, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > > >> On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 14:32:36 +0200 Rene Herman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >> wrote: > > >>> Provide MODULE_MAINTAINER() as a convenient place to stick a name and > > >>> email address both for drivers having multiple (current and > > >>> non-current) authors and for when someone who wants to maintain a > > >>> driver isn't so much an author. > > > > > > [ snip ] > > > > > >> I'm not sure we want to do this - that's what ./MAINTAINERS is for and we > > >> end up having to maintain the same info in two places. > > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ less ./MAINTAINERS > > > ./MAINTAINERS: No such file or directory > > > > > > MAINTAINERS is a developers thing, not users, yet a maintainer is someone > > > who other than by developers wants to be contacted by users of a > > > particular > > > driver. Right now, a module exports a set of name and email addresses > > > through the MODULE_AUTHOR tag but given multiple current and non-current > > > authors, completely or largely orphaned drivers (I have a lot of junk PC > > > hardware so I come across those relatively often) and people who might be > > > interested in taking care of a driver but who do not consider themselves > > > an > > > author for (upto now) having done a s/, struct pt_regs// on it, that tag > > > only confuses the issue of whom to contact. > > > > > > And it in fact even does so when Joe does know about a MAINTAINERS file > > > and > > > does happen to have a kernel source tree lying around somewhere. With one > > > set of addresses displayed prominently inside the sourcecode of the very > > > driver and another one of in a MAINTAINERS file, the first one wins. Joe > > > would have to be very new to Linux to trust something in the tree that's > > > not actually compiled over something that is. > > > > > > As the first response in this thread Cristoph Hellwig stated that > > > MODULE_AUTHOR serves no purpose other than what MODULE_MAINTAINER would > > > be > > > serving. Others agreed and Adrian Bunk suggested deleting MODULE_AUTHOR > > > outright. > > > > > > That would actually also serve my purposes; if there's no MODULE_AUTHOR > > > confusing the issue, I don't so much need a MODULE_MAINTAINER to fix it > > > again. I believe having "modinfo" (optionally!) display a contact address > > > for a driver might be a user advantage, but with all the wrong addresses > > > gone, I don't really care deeply; MODULE_AUTHOR doesn't serve the purpose > > > today and with it gone the user at least knows he needs to look > > > elsewhere. > > > MODULE_AUTHOR is also a credits issue but the information can be > > > transferred to copyright headers. It would obviously also fix any > > > possible > > > maintenance issues. > > > > > > Alan Cox believes that having author information embedded in the module > > > serves a legal purpose though and objects to removal. > > Wouldn't a /* comment */ satisfy AUTHOR needs? > > It gives deserved attribution and should serve legal purpose just as > well as a macro does (IANAL!).
Alan's opinion in [1] sounds reasonable (and I trust that he knows what he is talking about). > IMO we want MAINTAINER info in the macro and in modinfo, > so I'm for removing MODULE_AUTHOR and just having MAINTAINER. >... I don't think we want to expose maintainership information to users at all: - duplicates information in MAINTAINERS - maintainers sometimes disappear - the 3 year old kernel of your distribution would contain 3 year old maintainership information IMHO the default should be that users report problems with distribution kernels to their distribution and problems with ftp.kernel.org kernels to either linux-kernel or the kernel Bugzilla. > ~Randy cu Adrian [1] http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/4/4/260 -- "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 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
