Richard Knutsson wrote: > Any thoughts on this is very much appreciated (is there any flaws with > this?).
The thought that crossed my mind was: Why not do the same thing that was done to the "Help"-file. (Before it was superseded by Kconfig). Originaly there was a central Help-file, with all the texts. Then it was split and placed in each sub-dir. And later it was superseded by Kconfig. On the other hand you could skip the intermediate step and just fold the Maintainer-data directly into Kconfig, that way everything is "in one place" and you could place a "Maintainers"-Button next to the "Help"-Button in *config, or just display it alongside the help. And MAYBE that would also lessen the "update-to-date"-problem, as you can just write the MAINTAINERs-data when you create/update the Kconfig-file. Which is a thing that creates much bigger pain when you forget it accidently. ;-) Oh, and it neadly solves the mapping-problem, for at least all kernel-parts that have a Kconfig-option/Sub-Tree. Bis denn -- Real Programmers consider "what you see is what you get" to be just as bad a concept in Text Editors as it is in women. No, the Real Programmer wants a "you asked for it, you got it" text editor -- complicated, cryptic, powerful, unforgiving, dangerous. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
