RE: https://fedi.lwn.net/@lwn/116239303710146388
And when you make changes to 20,000 kmalloc calls, you start getting CCed on a LOT of patches since you touched "neighboring code" recently. ðŸ˜
@kees I'm eagerly waiting for your upcoming patches to get_maintainer.pl next. 😉
Yeah, returning stuff from git history should only be a fallback for files without maintainers. I get my fair share of these Cc's and I'm always like WTF why am I included.
IMO it should also only include the most specific maintainers by default. If you have the maintainer for file foo/bar/baz, don't include the maintainer for foo/bar or foo.
@jani @kees the whole inheritance thing is kinda broken actually see [0] for an example of this being broken :)
Stuff lower in hierarchy that potentially impacts stuff higher up is not cc'd to those subject to it, stuff higher up does include lower-down etc.
I guess we need to distinguish between 'anything in this glob that's not already handled elsewhere' vs. 'I want to be cc'd on everything here'.
cc: @vbabka who loves editing get_maintainer.pl :P
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260308202425.C9EE4C116C6@smtp.kernel.org/T/#u
@jani @kees @vbabka I realise there's some thorny issues as to how to simultaneously avoid noise but also make sure the right people are cc'd.
And I whine a lot about cc (maybe too much tbh) on list because my mail is a disaster and I stupidly somewhat rely on it for my workflow atm, but it's important to get it right.
But right now get_maintainer.pl is enough of a pain it's understandable that a lot of people ignore it + go by gut, big win is improve defaults I think