Date: Mon, 31 May 2021 13:50:16 -0600 From: Alan Somers <asomers@freebsd.org> To: Jessica Clarke <jrtc27@freebsd.org> Cc: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>, Ed Maste <emaste@freebsd.org>, src-committers <src-committers@freebsd.org>, "<dev-commits-src-all@freebsd.org>" <dev-commits-src-all@freebsd.org>, dev-commits-src-main@freebsd.org Subject: Re: git: 5a20c351ea45 - main - [skip ci] add a CODEOWNERS file Message-ID: <CAOtMX2gDW=SvNF2EqrAs-N988pJtwy=GxJA=-kw2eFbrT5yHLw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <0434E9D2-B0AA-4B5E-942A-A393A83DFFD1@freebsd.org> References: <202105302249.14UMnbcl094541@gitrepo.freebsd.org> <CAPyFy2AHmrjdWyKnUMwEf5TnYub4j6um_rYHW6vwmvxR8g6LHw@mail.gmail.com> <CAOtMX2g7mHxQ3%2B0LWhwXLcDgrH0kedb2VrnPV9wmJMnA%2B6ZJDA@mail.gmail.com> <CAPyFy2DFUeEFGPD1tYcK48EcQkDd7DOBgmTwqXE5oj60qOsPKQ@mail.gmail.com> <CANCZdfoBa%2Bv8dBk6U3o2wW%2Bc-8w_fcHi85=9ZdiQfu1%2B=HAFdg@mail.gmail.com> <E778BD5D-1A73-42B0-93F1-871D7E0AC5EC@jrtc27.com> <CANCZdfqXb5pyFJ0cfCep1P73%2BC%2BR4hjXu5HkOF4ODjy7_AgGGw@mail.gmail.com> <0434E9D2-B0AA-4B5E-942A-A393A83DFFD1@freebsd.org>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On Mon, May 31, 2021 at 1:39 PM Jessica Clarke <jrtc27@freebsd.org> wrote: > On 31 May 2021, at 20:37, Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mon, May 31, 2021 at 1:21 PM Jessica Clarke <jrtc27@jrtc27.com> > wrote: > > On 31 May 2021, at 20:16, Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, May 31, 2021, 1:11 PM Ed Maste <emaste@freebsd.org> wrote: > > > On Mon, 31 May 2021 at 11:51, Alan Somers <asomers@freebsd.org> wrote: > > > > > > > >> > > > >> I think this file isn't the right place for (another copy of) this > > > >> text; perhaps the CODEOWNERS file should just reference the > top-level > > > >> MAINTAINERS? > > > > > > > > Except that CODEOWNERS is in a format that tools know how to parse. > If anything, MAINTAINERS should be a symlink to CODEOWNERS. > > > > > > At least the file's location and user IDs suggest that it is specific > > > to GitHub; in any case I don't really care which one points to which. > > > I hope we can agree though that we don't really want two different > > > files representing code ownership in different ways that both > > > independently refer to a third mechanism for recording code ownership > > > that's external to the source tree? > > > > > > It also works on gitlab, FWIW. The format is standard. Bummer we can't > generate it based on where it is published… > > > > We could conceivably have a CODEOWNERS.master from which the others can > be generated via `make codeowners` whenever someone edits it. Whether > that’s worth the hassle of implementing though for a file that shouldn’t > regularly be changing is unclear. > > > > Doing that's trivial... However, it would mean that the automatic > flagging that this file's presence gives wouldn't work... But then again, > there's no issues or pull requests at the gitlab mirror, so at the moment > it's a bit of a moot point. > > A hypothetical .gitlab/CODEOWNERS would be checked in as a generated file, > if that was unclear. Otherwise I’m not sure I understand your first point? > > Jess > There's no need to generate anything. Both github and gitlab support a CODEOWNERS file in the project's root. Let's just move it there. We can delete the old MAINTAINERS, too, once all of its entries have been converted.home | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAOtMX2gDW=SvNF2EqrAs-N988pJtwy=GxJA=-kw2eFbrT5yHLw>