[Mesa-dev] [RFC] add MAINTAINERS and get_maintainer.pl script

[Rob Herring]

On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 4:36 PM, Rob Clark <robdclark at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 5:32 PM, Ian Romanick <idr at freedesktop.org> wrote:
>> On 04/19/2016 02:11 PM, Rob Clark wrote:
>>> From: Rob Clark <robclark at freedesktop.org>
>>>
>>> Copied from linux kernel, with minimal changes to script (just to
>>> recognize mesa src tree rather than linux kernel src tree), and slimmed
>>> down MAINTAINER file syntax to recognize that we don't really have
>>> subsystem "maintainers" in the same sense as the linux kernel (ie. no
>>> different mailing lists and git trees per subsystem).
>>>
>>> The main point is to automate slapping on the correct CC's for patches
>>> via git's --cc-cmd feature, more than anything else.
>>>
>>> I didn't attempt to fully populate the MAINTAINERS file, by a long shot.
>>> The point was to just be able to test it, and get feedback if people
>>> like the idea.
>>>
>>> If you like the idea, let me know which file paths/subsystems you want
>>> me to add you to as designated reviewer ;-)
>>> ---
>>>  MAINTAINERS               |   49 +
>>>  scripts/get_maintainer.pl | 2300 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>  2 files changed, 2349 insertions(+)
>>>  create mode 100644 MAINTAINERS
>>>  create mode 100755 scripts/get_maintainer.pl
>>>
>>> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 0000000..52f64cb
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/MAINTAINERS
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,49 @@
>>> +Overview:
>>> +
>>> +     This file is similar in syntax (or more precisly a subset) of what is used
>>> +     for the linux kernel.  Some fields do not apply (for example, in all cases,
>>> +     send patches to mesa-dev at lists.freedesktop.org, and in all cases the
>>> +     patchwork instance is https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/project/mesa/),
>>> +     but is meant to give an idea of who to CC on various patches, and to allow
>>> +     for the use of scripts/get_maintainer.pl as git --cc-cmd.
>>> +
>>> +Descriptions of section entries:
>>> +
>>> +     R: Designated reviewer: FullName <address at domain>
>>> +        These reviewers should be CCed on patches.
>>> +     F: Files and directories with wildcard patterns.
>>> +        A trailing slash includes all files and subdirectory files.
>>> +        F:   drivers/net/    all files in and below drivers/net
>>> +        F:   drivers/net/*   all files in drivers/net, but not below
>>> +        F:   */net/*         all files in "any top level directory"/net
>>> +        One pattern per line.  Multiple F: lines acceptable.
>>> +     N: Files and directories with regex patterns.
>>> +        N:   [^a-z]tegra     all files whose path contains the word tegra
>>> +        One pattern per line.  Multiple N: lines acceptable.
>>> +        scripts/get_maintainer.pl has different behavior for files that
>>> +        match F: pattern and matches of N: patterns.  By default,
>>> +        get_maintainer will not look at git log history when an F: pattern
>>> +        match occurs.  When an N: match occurs, git log history is used
>>> +        to also notify the people that have git commit signatures.
>>> +
>>> +Note: For the hard of thinking, this list is meant to remain in alphabetical
>>> +order. If you could add yourselves to it in alphabetical order that would be
>>> +so much easier [Ed]
>>> +
>>> +Maintainers List (try to look for most precise areas first)
>>> +
>>> +             -----------------------------------
>>> +
>>> +FREEDRENO
>>> +R:   Rob Clark <robclark at freedesktop.org>
>>> +F:   src/gallium/drivers/freedreno/
>>> +
>>> +NIR
>>> +R:   Jason Ekstrand <jason at jlekstrand.net>
>>> +R:   Connor Abbott <cwabbott0 at gmail.com>
>>
>> Alphabetize?  What the "Note:" above doesn't say is if it should
>> alphabetize as 'sort' would or by name (last name, first name).
>
> I assume it was talking about order of subsystems, but maybe reviewers
> within subsystem should be sorted too..  I don't think it is *that*
> important (and I can drop the note, it was just copied from
> $linux/MAINTAINERS), since we don't have quite the level of churn as
> the linux kernel.

The reviewer order is generally in ranking order. Primary maintainer
first, secondary ones next. Though sometimes it is just an equal
group.

Sorting by file path probably makes the most sense IMO. Then all
gallium drivers would be grouped together for example.

Rob