Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com> wrote: > Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> writes: > >> On 7 April 2014 12:47, Juan Quintela <quint...@redhat.com> wrote: >>> Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> wrote: >>>> I'm really not a fan of this kind of single patch that >>>> touches a huge number of files at once. They're basically >>>> impossible to review and they introduce the possibility >>>> of conflicts between submaintainer tree changes and the >>>> big patch. There's no reason to have all these changes >>>> in a single patch -- I'd much rather see one patch per >>>> subsystem sent to the relevant submaintainers, plus >>>> one for all the unmaintained stuff which can go via >>>> the migration tree. >>> >>> If you say how to split, I am all for it. >> >> Like I said, one patch per maintained subsystem, >> one patch for the leftovers. > > Easier said than done. MAINTAINERS has more than 100 sections, yet it > leaves more than 1200 files uncovered, roughly half of them C sources. > I doubt splitting mechanically along those sections plus a catch-all > patch for the "unmaintained" files would be appreciated. > > Could you give some guidance on splitting?
+1
