Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: enable MAINTAINERS warning only for --strict,--subjective

2014-12-17 Thread Joe Perches
On Wed, 2014-12-17 at 07:53 -0800, Kevin Cernekee wrote: > On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 1:27 AM, Joe Perches wrote: > > On Tue, 2014-12-16 at 23:35 -0800, Brian Norris wrote: > >> The rule which delivers this warning is very prone to errors: > >> "added, moved or deleted file(s), does MAINTAINERS nee

Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: enable MAINTAINERS warning only for --strict,--subjective

2014-12-17 Thread Kevin Cernekee
On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 1:27 AM, Joe Perches wrote: > On Tue, 2014-12-16 at 23:35 -0800, Brian Norris wrote: >> The rule which delivers this warning is very prone to errors: >> "added, moved or deleted file(s), does MAINTAINERS need updating?" >> so it should not be enabled by default. > > I don

Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: enable MAINTAINERS warning only for --strict,--subjective

2014-12-17 Thread Joe Perches
On Tue, 2014-12-16 at 23:35 -0800, Brian Norris wrote: > The rule which delivers this warning is very prone to errors: > "added, moved or deleted file(s), does MAINTAINERS need updating?" > so it should not be enabled by default. I don't think so. It's _far_ more common for people to forget to

[PATCH] checkpatch: enable MAINTAINERS warning only for --strict,--subjective

2014-12-16 Thread Brian Norris
The rule which delivers this warning is very prone to errors: "added, moved or deleted file(s), does MAINTAINERS need updating?" so it should not be enabled by default. The current checkpatch rule doesn't check: 1. whether other patches in the same series update MAINTAINERS 2. whether MAINTA