Re: [PATCH 3/3] get_maintainer: add patch-only pattern matching type

[Greg KH]

On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 03:46:30PM +0900, Justin Stitt wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 3:14 PM Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 03:19:16AM +0000, Justin Stitt wrote:
> > > Note that folks really shouldn't be using get_maintainer on tree files
> > > anyways [1].
> >
> > That's not true, Linus and I use it on a daily basis this way, it's part
> > of our normal workflow, AND the workflow of the kernel security team.
> >
> > So please don't take that valid use-case away from us.
> 
> Fair. I'm on the side of keeping the "K:'' behavior the way it is and
> that's why I'm proposing adding "D:" to provide a more granular
> content matching type operating strictly on patches. It's purely
> opt-in.
> 
> The patch I linked mentioned steering folks away from using
> tree files but not necessarily removing the behavior.

Please don't steer folks away from it, it is a valid use case of the
tool, and I would argue, one of the most important ones given how often
I use it that way.

Hence my objection to this verbage in the changelog, it's not correct.

thanks,

greg k-h