On Sat, May 12, 2007 at 01:15:30PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > > I'd prefer not. I get reports from people about drivers that got "lost"
> > > by vendors, regularly. Nor am I pointing fingers at specific vendors here,
> > > last month I sorted out a two year old "lost in Red Hat Bugzilla" kernel
> >
> > I'd prefer not. I get reports from people about drivers that got "lost"
> > by vendors, regularly. Nor am I pointing fingers at specific vendors here,
> > last month I sorted out a two year old "lost in Red Hat Bugzilla" kernel
> > bug for example.
>
> How many maintainers want to get bug repo
On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 10:35:00PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > This still wouldn't solve the following problems:
> > - I doubt it will be kept up to date for all > 2800 modules in the kernel
> > - the 3 year old kernel of your distribution would contain 3 year old
> > maintainership information
>
Rene Herman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> /* Author, ideally of form NAME [, NAME ]*[ and NAME ]
>
> After my trivial patch, it says:
>
> /* Author, ideally of form NAME[, NAME]*[ and NAME] */
I think I would put something like this:
/* Author, of form NAME[, NAME]*[ and NAME]
* If you have a p
> This still wouldn't solve the following problems:
> - I doubt it will be kept up to date for all > 2800 modules in the kernel
> - the 3 year old kernel of your distribution would contain 3 year old
> maintainership information
> - maintainers sometimes disappear
Maintainers sometimes DON'T dis
On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 07:42:38AM -0400, John Anthony Kazos Jr. wrote:
> > > The email address is the problem I was trying to fix; with multiple
> > > current
> > > and non-current authors and maintainers who might not even be authors the
> > > address(es) available from the tag confuse the iss
On 05/11/2007 01:42 PM, John Anthony Kazos Jr. wrote:
Can't we just subtitle it somehow? Add tags: " (current maintainer)", "
(original author, inactive)", " (bug and defect reports)", or whatever
you like after the names.
Yes, that's close to Rusty's version of the original MODULE_MAINTAINER
On 05/11/2007 04:40 PM, Alan Cox wrote:
But it's not a style issue. It's solving a problem. The adresses from this
tag are the only addresses available from the binary and as such are
mistaken for maintainer/general contact addresses which they often are not.
Which is why you want MODULE_MAIN
> > Whether someone puts their email address into the entry is their own
> > business. We do not need a style police for module author entries.
>
> This particular patch just deletes the _advice_ to add an address; if you'd
> consider it a style issue, you shouldn't be objecting.
We should merel
On 05/11/2007 12:46 PM, Alan Cox wrote:
The email address is the problem I was trying to fix; with multiple current
and non-current authors and maintainers who might not even be authors the
address(es) available from the tag confuse the issue of whom to contact.
It's moreover also information
> > The email address is the problem I was trying to fix; with multiple current
> > and non-current authors and maintainers who might not even be authors the
> > address(es) available from the tag confuse the issue of whom to contact.
> > It's moreover also information that easily outdated.
> >
> The email address is the problem I was trying to fix; with multiple current
> and non-current authors and maintainers who might not even be authors the
> address(es) available from the tag confuse the issue of whom to contact.
> It's moreover also information that easily outdated.
>
> A bit m
12 matches
Mail list logo
