>>> On 22.02.18 at 10:27, <alan.robin...@ts.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 02:16:23AM -0700, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> From: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com>
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH] get_maintainers.pl: Avoid THE_REST when files are
>> added or removed
>> >>> On 22.02.18 at 10:09, <alan.robin...@ts.fujitsu.com> wrote:
>> > When files are added or removed /dev/null is used as a place
>> > holder name in the patch for the absent file. Don't try and
>> > find a MAINTAINER for this place holder, it only ever flags
>> > and then spams THE REST.
>> When a file is added, it falls under THE REST maintainership unless
>> there's a pattern already in place covering the file, or a new entry
>> is being added at the same time. When a file is removed, whoever
>> was its maintainer should be Cc-ed. So perhaps it's rather the
>> /dev/null placeholder use that's wrong?
> Exactly - that what this patch tries to do...
> get_maintainers.pl collects filename from the '+++' and '---' lines. A
> normal (not add/remove) patch looks like this:
> diff --git a/scripts/get_maintainer.pl b/scripts/get_maintainer.pl
> index 0ce2d367fa..277ba17a67 100755
> --- a/scripts/get_maintainer.pl
> +++ b/scripts/get_maintainer.pl
> An add/delete patch looks like this:
> diff --git a/xen/common/cpupool.c b/xen/common/cpupool.c
> deleted file mode 100644
> index 999839444e..0000000000
> --- a/xen/common/cpupool.c
> +++ /dev/null
> Here get_maintainers.pl finds two files, change _just_ ignores the
Oh, I see - it's the file name collection code you change, not the
consuming side, I'm sorry for the noise. However, isn't
omitting the leading / a potential problem then? While it's not
very likely for us to gain ./dev/null, it's also not entirely impossible.
Furthermore, shouldn't you move the setting of $lastfile into
the conditional as well?
Xen-devel mailing list