arm-soc maintainer entry

Is the arm at kernel.org alias going to be added into the MAINTAINERS file?
Should anybody be sending mails to this address?

It seems I asked this over a year ago and the response was positive but
nothing ever happened[1]. Maybe something like below? I only ask because
get_maintainer.pl isn't picking up this email.

diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
index ecd8796..0e1ec23 100644
--- a/MAINTAINERS
+++ b/MAINTAINERS

@@ -606,6 +606,14 @@ W: http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
 S:     Maintained
 F:     arch/arm/

+ARM SUB-ARCHITECTURES
+M:     arm at kernel.org
+L:     linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org (moderated for non-subscribers)
+S:     MAINTAINED
+F:     arch/arm/mach-*/
+F:     arch/arm/plat-*/
+T:     git git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/arm/arm-soc.git
+
 ARM PRIMECELL AACI PL041 DRIVER
 M:     Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
 S:     Maintained

[1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/7/26/307

-- 
Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.

Hi,

On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 1:41 AM, Stephen Boyd [off-list ref] wrote:

Is the arm at kernel.org alias going to be added into the MAINTAINERS file?
Should anybody be sending mails to this address?

It seems I asked this over a year ago and the response was positive but
nothing ever happened[1]. Maybe something like below? I only ask because
get_maintainer.pl isn't picking up this email.

I've been holding off re-proposing this, mostly because life is easier
for us if we don't get arm at kernel.org cc:d on every single patch by
people who run get_maintainers.pl -- it's the equivalent of getting
linux-arm-kernel cc:d to your inbox. It's better signal-to-noise ratio
if it's mostly platform maintainers that email us on that address with
pull requests or patches they want applied.

But yeah, it also means that the maintainer structure is undocumented.
I'm open for suggestions.


-Olof

On 10/04/12 09:55, Olof Johansson wrote:

Hi,

On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 1:41 AM, Stephen Boyd [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Is the arm at kernel.org alias going to be added into the MAINTAINERS file?
Should anybody be sending mails to this address?

It seems I asked this over a year ago and the response was positive but
nothing ever happened[1]. Maybe something like below? I only ask because
get_maintainer.pl isn't picking up this email.

I've been holding off re-proposing this, mostly because life is easier
for us if we don't get arm at kernel.org cc:d on every single patch by
people who run get_maintainers.pl -- it's the equivalent of getting
linux-arm-kernel cc:d to your inbox. It's better signal-to-noise ratio
if it's mostly platform maintainers that email us on that address with
pull requests or patches they want applied.

But yeah, it also means that the maintainer structure is undocumented.
I'm open for suggestions.

Thanks for clarifying. Maybe we can put in the git tree and no email
address? That at least documents some structure.

-- 
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by The Linux Foundation

On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 11:49 AM, Stephen Boyd [off-list ref] wrote:

On 10/04/12 09:55, Olof Johansson wrote:

quoted

Hi,

On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 1:41 AM, Stephen Boyd [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Is the arm at kernel.org alias going to be added into the MAINTAINERS file?
Should anybody be sending mails to this address?

It seems I asked this over a year ago and the response was positive but
nothing ever happened[1]. Maybe something like below? I only ask because
get_maintainer.pl isn't picking up this email.

I've been holding off re-proposing this, mostly because life is easier
for us if we don't get arm at kernel.org cc:d on every single patch by
people who run get_maintainers.pl -- it's the equivalent of getting
linux-arm-kernel cc:d to your inbox. It's better signal-to-noise ratio
if it's mostly platform maintainers that email us on that address with
pull requests or patches they want applied.

But yeah, it also means that the maintainer structure is undocumented.
I'm open for suggestions.

Thanks for clarifying. Maybe we can put in the git tree and no email
address? That at least documents some structure.

Ah, yes, that makes a lot of sense.


-Olof