From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C879A17CE for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2022 08:50:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id A73C65C022B; Wed, 10 Aug 2022 04:50:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 10 Aug 2022 04:50:27 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kroah.com; h=cc :cc:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:sender:subject :subject:to:to; s=fm1; t=1660121427; x=1660207827; bh=Mn7hBSEhvg zlsbBENVS9Ab++V4tMMQam1V+vLvu584g=; b=laQmv4BPhMnYKkbzP9WI2sHpIo 81RWOOU/yNXYCZ4Bcvd1Pb6jEqK/vabOh3AKILjqqxmg/q+1b19Rg0D+CYopgSEZ BEzuuwr7p8SS7j2lq08tG7S/CbrOy295fxfWNz9V4uj3rvpD/a04qKhrQ6fVtcZM mXmeeGhR4VtsbEDydE3D1Ac6yPA293c3zSsuTznnRF7iF1HXkBL/ZI9brssyyxHT HPo224pAL1IZF6s/XODlaEuBXrW41aYY389xsuGt3IAUM9Mv7EKwNKAomCOm2Bhu n0tSXs7jNE48Mim37cXgDnk747UZsH2sITQ5XdnZJzExZV9EyeM20b6wRHMg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:date:date:feedback-id :feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id :mime-version:references:reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to :x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s= fm1; t=1660121427; x=1660207827; bh=Mn7hBSEhvgzlsbBENVS9Ab++V4tM MQam1V+vLvu584g=; b=3Cqh5h8NMRJsxhJROi33jStDUT1GkOUwaoRGal66ZwnE bIazyq+WuOq7MOHHStI+ay3//pwTNCZd2OZ61V4BpaP9XVo4VgYcnv7fAdOu69i5 JdefUwdd8ZHvxgQbu8EUkl2+DswNYe6JP1bHRkDlAeBkiIc2ODWxBb+oRgV45HWg pVYZ981wtH3A0k8AtntkAPRXUXIcHz+++XSnJocvXmPoqBEKuvYopaf7Bqm22QfB WHxPUaEjzZuRhC3W9qrSxrfj691VFsI6kyeHWibC7JQK9RCgnq092K2y/I0S/9FZ 6wJe1AdRBbMPbWNQDDO/AL+7pUlP3QYhD1EhSXspmg== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvfedrvdegvddgtdehucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepfffhvfevuffkfhggtggujgesthdtredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepifhrvghg ucfmjfcuoehgrhgvgheskhhrohgrhhdrtghomheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepheegvd evvdeljeeugfdtudduhfekledtiefhveejkeejuefhtdeufefhgfehkeetnecuvehluhhs thgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepghhrvghgsehkrhhorg hhrdgtohhm X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i787e41f1:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Wed, 10 Aug 2022 04:50:27 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2022 10:23:04 +0200 From: Greg KH To: Stephen Hemminger Cc: ksummit@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: Validating MAINTAINERS entries? Message-ID: References: <20220809171316.1d6ce319@hermes.local> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: ksummit@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20220809171316.1d6ce319@hermes.local> On Tue, Aug 09, 2022 at 05:13:16PM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > Several times in the past, when using MAINTAINERS list either automatically > (or from manual entry) have found the mailing address in the file is no longer valid. > > What about doing an annual probe mail to all maintainers and sending > a patch to prune out any addresses that auto respond as dead. > This won't catch ghost entries but would find any dead ones. > > Yes, it would be great to sweep the MAINTAINERS file once a year or so. I know others have attempted to do it, but no one has really stuck with it. There's no real reason why anyone can't do this if they want to send the patches for it. thanks, greg k-h