Re: [PATCH v4 12/14] MAINTAINERS: add maintainers for netlink_yml_parser.py

Jakub Kicinski <[email protected]>
Newsgroups dev.linux.lists.lkmm,dev.linux.lists.linux-kernel-mentees,org.kernel.vger.linux-doc,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kernel.vger.netdev
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Sat, 14 Jun 2025 20:56:09 +0200 Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> > I understand that from the PoV of ease of maintenance of the docs.
> > Is it fair to say there is a trade off here between ease of maintenance
> > for docs maintainers and encouraging people to integrate with kernel
> > docs in novel ways?  
> 
> Placing elsewhere won't make much difference from doc maintainers and
> developers.

I must be missing your point. Clearly it makes a difference to Donald,
who is a maintainer of the docs in question.

> I'm more interested on having a single place where python libraries
> could be placed.

Me too, especially for selftests. But it's not clear to me that
scripts/ is the right location. I thought purely user space code
should live in tools/ and bulk of YNL is for user space.

> Eventually, some classes might be re-used in the future
> by multiple scripts and subsystems, when it makes sense, just like we do
> already with Kernel's kAPIs. This also helps when checking what is the
> Python's minimal version that are required by the Kernel when updating
> it at:

I think this is exactly the same point Donald is making, but from YNL
perspective. The hope is to share more code between the ReST generator,
the existing C generator and Python library. The later two are already
based on a shared spec model.
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.