Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: add warning for non-lore mailing list URLs

[Peter Collingbourne]

On Thu, Nov 3, 2022 at 6:41 PM Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2022-11-03 at 18:34 -0700, Peter Collingbourne wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 3, 2022 at 6:27 PM Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, 2022-11-03 at 18:07 -0700, Peter Collingbourne wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Oct 19, 2022 at 03:28:43PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > > > > From: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > >
> > > > > The lkml.org, marc.info, spinics.net, etc archives are not quite as useful
> > > > > as lore.kernel.org because they use different styles, add advertising, and
> > > > > may disappear in the future.  The lore archives are more consistent and
> > > > > more likely to stick around, so prefer https://lore.kernel.org URLs when
> > > > > they exist.
> > > >
> > > > If the commit message contains a line like:
> > > >
> > > > Cc: linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > >
> > > > this patch causes checkpatch.pl to complain. Would it be possible to
> > > > restrict this to URLs?
> > >
> > > Yes, I believe this would probably work well enough:
> > > ---
> > >  scripts/checkpatch.pl | 3 ++-
> > >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> > > index 7be93c3df2bcb..fe25642d8bacc 100755
> > > --- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> > > +++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> > > @@ -3336,7 +3336,8 @@ sub process {
> > >                 }
> > >
> > >  # Check for mailing list archives other than lore.kernel.org
> > > -               if ($rawline =~ m{\b$obsolete_archives}) {
> > > +               if ($rawline =~ m{\b$obsolete_archives} &&
> > > +                   $rawline !~ /^\s*cc:/i) {
> >
> > Can we make this (to|cc): instead? Otherwise developers (like me) who
> > use custom scripts to add To: headers to their patches before passing
> > them to checkpatch.pl will also hit this warning if their patch is
> > being sent To: one of these mailing lists.
>
> I think adding "To:" would be odd and unnecessary as it's not
> something that would actually be in a patch.
>
> You could use another front-end script to strip those "To:" from
> checkpatch inputs.

OK, I made that work, so I guess I don't mind much what we do here.

Peter