Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/3] MAINTAINERS: Improve section headlines

[Cornelia Huck]

On Mon, 03 Jun 2019 10:29:35 +0200
Markus Armbruster <address@hidden> wrote:

> Aleksandar Markovic <address@hidden> writes:
> 
> > On May 29, 2019 5:09 PM, "Markus Armbruster" <address@hidden> wrote:  
> >>
> >> When scripts/get_maintainer.pl reports something like
> >>
> >>     John Doe <address@hidden> (maintainer:Overall)
> >>
> >> the user is left to wonder *which* of our three "Overall" sections
> >> applies.  We have three, one each under "Guest CPU cores (TCG)",
> >> "Guest CPU Cores (KVM)", and "Overall usermode emulation".
> >>
> >> Rename sections under
> >>
> >> * "Guest CPU cores (TCG)" from "FOO" to "FOO CPU cores (TCG)"
> >>
> >> * "Guest CPU Cores (KVM)" from "FOO" to "FOO CPU cores (KVM)"
> >>
> >> * "Guest CPU Cores (Xen)" from "FOO" to "FOO CPU cores (Xen)"
> >>  
> >
> > In its essence definitely not a bad idea, but I must admit I tend to agree
> > with Philippe the new titles sound confusing, odd, artificial. Perhaps the
> > better alternative could be:
> >
> > “FOO TCG guest”
> > “FOO KVM guest”
> > “FOO Xen guest”  
> 
> Other suggestions mentioned so far:
> 
>   "FOO CPUs (TCG)"
>   "TCG FOO CPUs"
> 
> and same for KVM and Xen.
> 
> I guess mentioning target first, accelerator second, no parenthesis
> makes sense.  That leaves "guest" vs. "CPUs".  Which one's closer to the
> truth?

'CPUs' makes more sense to me; 'guest' would also include
(architecture-specific) emulated devices.

> 
> >> * "Architecture support" from "FOO" to "FOO general architecture
> >>   support"
> >>  
> >
> > Here we have a kind of strange situation with S390 architecture - it is the
> > only one present in this way in MAINTAINERS. Othrr than that, your new
> > wording looks fine to me.  
> 
> Yes, it's odd.  But it's what works for the S390 maintainers.

Yes. I basically integrate all s390 stuff, including pull requests from
others. I'm more wondering why other architectures don't do that as
well :) Different setup, I guess.