Re: [workflows]Re: [PATCH] get_maintainer: only use THE REST as a fallback

[Steven Rostedt]

On Fri, 9 Oct 2026 20:37:42 +0200
Willy Tarreau <w@xxxxxx> wrote:

> I went into the same situation ~20 years ago, with filters sending LKML
> traffic into a dedicated folder, to then realize that I was no longer
> reading them because it requires to actively think about it and make an
> effort. So I turned this back to my normal folder and I can have a glance
> at them as messages arrive (like I'm seeing this one BTW).
> 
> I understand the problem of volume on LKML that's not really compatible with
> 2k emails a day (nor with many people's expectations), but at the same time
> I think that a dedicated catch-all list with way less subscribers would be
> really nice for those who want to stay a bit informed of what's happening.

Agreed. I look at LKML every so often to see what's happening in the kernel.

If there is a catch all, could we make it only kernel patches. Tooling
patches (like my own trace-cmd patches) should not go to the kernel list.

I could then unsubscribe from LKML and subscribe to that instead.

-- Steve