Re: RFC: switching "THE REST" in MAINTAINERS away from linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

[Konstantin Ryabitsev <konstantin@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Mon, Nov 06, 2023 at 09:05:12AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > - due to the sheer volume of messages, LKML is generally seen as useless for
> > >   holding any actual discussions
> > 
> > I have never had that impression of LKML.
> 
> Same here, I am actually reading through lkml, although superficially
> skipping over some bits, and definitively starting discussions there.

Hence my use of the word "generally."

> Restricting access to the new lkml is not acceptable.

It's not the "new lkml" -- the LKML is still there, it would just no longer be
a dumping ground for copies of all patches.

I also intentionally wrote "pre-moderated" instead of "restricted."
Subscriptions are still open, we just request a valid reason why someone wants
to receive copies of all patches.

> How about restricting access to all lists for gmail addresses if gmail is so
> broken?

Today it's gmail, tomorrow it's something else. Just a month ago all services
using outlook.com were broken for days:
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/answers/questions/1388775/outlook-com-servers-tells-server-busy-please-try-a

All I want is to know is why someone wants to receive a copy of all patches
via SMTP when much more effective mechanisms to achieve the same are
available. If someone can provide a valid reason -- such as being a
high-profile maintainer -- then of course I'll be happy to let them subscribe.

-K