[v2,0/2] get_maintainer: add patch-only keyword matching

  This series aims to add "D:" which behaves exactly the same as "K:" but
works only on patch files.

The goal of this is to reduce noise when folks use get_maintainer on
tree files as opposed to patches. "D:" should help maintainers reduce
noise in their inboxes, especially when matching omnipresent
keywords like [1]. In the event of [1] Kees would be to/cc'd from folks
running get_maintainer on _any_ file containing "__counted_by". The
number of these files is rising and I fear for his inbox as his goal, as
I understand it, is to simply monitor the introduction of new
__counted_by annotations to ensure accurate semantics.

Joe mentioned in v1 that perhaps K: should be reworked to only consider
patch files. I wonder, though, if folks are intentionally using the
current behavior of K: and thus would be peeved from a change there. I
see this series as, at the very least, a gentle migration in behavior
which is purely opt-in and at some point could eagerly be merged with
K:.

[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230925172037.work.853-kees@kernel.org/

Signed-off-by: Justin Stitt <justinstitt@google.com>
---
Changes in v2:
- remove bits about non-patch usage being bad (thanks Greg, Kees, et al.)
- remove formatting pass (thanks Joe) (but seriously the formatting is
  bad, is there opportunity to get a formatting pass in here at some
  point?)
- add some migration from K to D (thanks Kees, Nick)
- Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230927-get_maintainer_add_d-v1-0-28c207229e72@google.com

---
Justin Stitt (2):
      get_maintainer: add patch-only keyword-matching
      MAINTAINERS: migrate some K to D

 MAINTAINERS               | 21 ++++++++++++++-------
 scripts/get_maintainer.pl | 12 ++++++++++--
 2 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
---
base-commit: 6465e260f48790807eef06b583b38ca9789b6072
change-id: 20230926-get_maintainer_add_d-07424a814e72

Best regards,
--
Justin Stitt <justinstitt@google.com>
  

On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 11:09 PM Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2023-09-28 at 14:31 +0900, Justin Stitt wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 2:01 PM Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, 2023-09-28 at 04:23 +0000, Justin Stitt wrote:
> > > > Changes in v2:
> > > > - remove formatting pass (thanks Joe) (but seriously the formatting is
> > > >   bad, is there opportunity to get a formatting pass in here at some
> > > >   point?)
> > >
> > > Why?  What is it that makes you believe the formatting is bad?
> > >
> >
> > Investigating further, it looked especially bad in my editor. There is
> > a mixture of
> > tabs and spaces and my vim tabstop is set to 4 for pl files. Setting this to
> > 8 is a whole lot better. But I still see some weird spacing
> >
>
> Yes, it's a bit odd indentation.
> It's emacs default perl format.
> 4 space indent with 8 space tabs, maximal tab fill.
>

Oh! What?! That's the most surprising convention I've ever heard of
(after the GNU C coding style).  Yet another thing to hold against
perl I guess. :P

I have my editor setup to highlight tabs vs spaces via visual cues, so
that I don't mess up kernel coding style. (`git clang-format HEAD~`
after a commit helps).  scripts/get_maintainer.pl has some serious
inconsistencies to the point where I'm not sure what it should or was
meant to be.  Now that you mention it, I see it, and it does seem
consistent in that regard.

Justin, is your formatter configurable to match that convention?
Maybe it's still useful, as long as you configure it to stick to the
pre-existing convention.
  

On Fri, Sep 29, 2023 at 12:52 AM Nick Desaulniers
<ndesaulniers@google.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 11:09 PM Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 2023-09-28 at 14:31 +0900, Justin Stitt wrote:
> > > On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 2:01 PM Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 2023-09-28 at 04:23 +0000, Justin Stitt wrote:
> > > > > Changes in v2:
> > > > > - remove formatting pass (thanks Joe) (but seriously the formatting is
> > > > >   bad, is there opportunity to get a formatting pass in here at some
> > > > >   point?)
> > > >
> > > > Why?  What is it that makes you believe the formatting is bad?
> > > >
> > >
> > > Investigating further, it looked especially bad in my editor. There is
> > > a mixture of
> > > tabs and spaces and my vim tabstop is set to 4 for pl files. Setting this to
> > > 8 is a whole lot better. But I still see some weird spacing
> > >
> >
> > Yes, it's a bit odd indentation.
> > It's emacs default perl format.
> > 4 space indent with 8 space tabs, maximal tab fill.
> >
>
> Oh! What?! That's the most surprising convention I've ever heard of
> (after the GNU C coding style).  Yet another thing to hold against
> perl I guess. :P
>
> I have my editor setup to highlight tabs vs spaces via visual cues, so
> that I don't mess up kernel coding style. (`git clang-format HEAD~`
> after a commit helps).  scripts/get_maintainer.pl has some serious
> inconsistencies to the point where I'm not sure what it should or was
> meant to be.  Now that you mention it, I see it, and it does seem
> consistent in that regard.
>
> Justin, is your formatter configurable to match that convention?
> Maybe it's still useful, as long as you configure it to stick to the
> pre-existing convention.

Negative, all the perl formatters I've tried will convert everything to spaces.
The best I've seen is perltidy.

https://gist.github.com/JustinStitt/347385921c80a5212c2672075aa769b6

> --
> Thanks,
> ~Nick Desaulniers
  

On Fri, 2023-09-29 at 11:07 +0900, Justin Stitt wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 29, 2023 at 12:52 AM Nick Desaulniers
> <ndesaulniers@google.com> wrote:
> > 
> > On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 11:09 PM Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > On Thu, 2023-09-28 at 14:31 +0900, Justin Stitt wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 2:01 PM Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > On Thu, 2023-09-28 at 04:23 +0000, Justin Stitt wrote:
> > > > > > Changes in v2:
> > > > > > - remove formatting pass (thanks Joe) (but seriously the formatting is
> > > > > >   bad, is there opportunity to get a formatting pass in here at some
> > > > > >   point?)
> > > > > 

LG G7 Battery Replacement | Guide | Is it actually a Samsung? I t
> > > > > Why?  What is it that makes you believe the formatting is bad?
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Investigating further, it looked especially bad in my editor. There is
> > > > a mixture of
> > > > tabs and spaces and my vim tabstop is set to 4 for pl files. Setting this to
> > > > 8 is a whole lot better. But I still see some weird spacing
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Yes, it's a bit odd indentation.
> > > It's emacs default perl format.
> > > 4 space indent with 8 space tabs, maximal tab fill.
> > > 
> > 
> > Oh! What?! That's the most surprising convention I've ever heard of
> > (after the GNU C coding style).  Yet another thing to hold against
> > perl I guess. :P
> > 
> > I have my editor setup to highlight tabs vs spaces via visual cues, so
> > that I don't mess up kernel coding style. (`git clang-format HEAD~`
> > after a commit helps).  scripts/get_maintainer.pl has some serious
> > inconsistencies to the point where I'm not sure what it should or was
> > meant to be.  Now that you mention it, I see it, and it does seem
> > consistent in that regard.
> > 
> > Justin, is your formatter configurable to match that convention?
> > Maybe it's still useful, as long as you configure it to stick to the
> > pre-existing convention.
> 
> Negative, all the perl formatters I've tried will convert everything to spaces.
> The best I've seen is perltidy.
> 
> https://gist.github.com/JustinStitt/347385921c80a5212c2672075aa769b6

emacs with cperl mode works fine.

I don't know much about vim, but when I open this file in vim
it looks perfectly normal and it's apparently properly syntax
highlighted.
  

On Fri, Sep 29, 2023 at 11:50 AM Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2023-09-29 at 11:07 +0900, Justin Stitt wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 29, 2023 at 12:52 AM Nick Desaulniers
> > <ndesaulniers@google.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 11:09 PM Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 2023-09-28 at 14:31 +0900, Justin Stitt wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 2:01 PM Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, 2023-09-28 at 04:23 +0000, Justin Stitt wrote:
> > > > > > > Changes in v2:
> > > > > > > - remove formatting pass (thanks Joe) (but seriously the formatting is
> > > > > > >   bad, is there opportunity to get a formatting pass in here at some
> > > > > > >   point?)
> > > > > >
>
> LG G7 Battery Replacement | Guide | Is it actually a Samsung? I t
> > > > > > Why?  What is it that makes you believe the formatting is bad?
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Investigating further, it looked especially bad in my editor. There is
> > > > > a mixture of
> > > > > tabs and spaces and my vim tabstop is set to 4 for pl files. Setting this to
> > > > > 8 is a whole lot better. But I still see some weird spacing
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Yes, it's a bit odd indentation.
> > > > It's emacs default perl format.
> > > > 4 space indent with 8 space tabs, maximal tab fill.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Oh! What?! That's the most surprising convention I've ever heard of
> > > (after the GNU C coding style).  Yet another thing to hold against
> > > perl I guess. :P
> > >
> > > I have my editor setup to highlight tabs vs spaces via visual cues, so
> > > that I don't mess up kernel coding style. (`git clang-format HEAD~`
> > > after a commit helps).  scripts/get_maintainer.pl has some serious
> > > inconsistencies to the point where I'm not sure what it should or was
> > > meant to be.  Now that you mention it, I see it, and it does seem
> > > consistent in that regard.
> > >
> > > Justin, is your formatter configurable to match that convention?
> > > Maybe it's still useful, as long as you configure it to stick to the
> > > pre-existing convention.
> >
> > Negative, all the perl formatters I've tried will convert everything to spaces.
> > The best I've seen is perltidy.
> >
> > https://gist.github.com/JustinStitt/347385921c80a5212c2672075aa769b6
>
> emacs with cperl mode works fine.
>
> I don't know much about vim, but when I open this file in vim
> it looks perfectly normal and it's apparently properly syntax
> highlighted.
>

I believe a :set tabstop=2 will make it look weird. But really,
this whole formatting thing is a non-issue for me personally
once I discovered what the problem was. I'm not sure this
file attracts nearly enough eyes to warrant an eager
formatting attempt as I was previously preaching for.

Nick and I using vim with special tab handling are most definitely
the exception and for most folks this file probably looks fine.