On 11/05/2013 01:50 PM, Joe Perches wrote: > On Tue, 2013-11-05 at 13:42 +0800, Chen Gang wrote: >> On 11/05/2013 01:23 PM, Joe Perches wrote: >>> On Tue, 2013-11-05 at 10:37 +0800, Chen Gang wrote: > >> (if so, it seems the related >> patch need be re-committed again by the related author). > > No it doesn't mean that. > > Prior to this patch, get_maintainer only used "sign-off-by" > style lines to find interested parties to send patches to > when the MAINTAINERS file did not have a specific section > entry with a matching file pattern to the files that that > the patch modified. > > And there was a defect in the script when no commit history > at all was found for the files modified during the period > selected (1 year of git log history by default) > > Now, using this newly modified get_maintainer.pl script, > the commit authors shown in the git log history as well as > the commit signers are selected. > > If there is no git history, the script defect is also fixed. >
Yeah, our "get_maintainer.pl" need be smart enough to bear it (this patch let our "get_maintainer.pl" smart enough). But for this kind of patch, need it re-commit again? (for me, I recommend to re-commit it again by the related author). Thanks. -- Chen Gang -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/