[v1,0/1,RFC] MAINTAINERS: Record old email addresses

  Hi gcc-patches mailing list,
Claudio Bantaloukas via Sourceware Forge <forge-bot+rdfm@forge-stage.sourceware.org> has requested that the following forgejo pull request
be published on the mailing list.

Created on: 2026-08-04 10:28:16+00:00
Latest update: 2026-08-04 10:32:58+00:00
Changes: 0 changed files, 0 additions, 0 deletions
Head revision: gcc/gcc ref refs/pull/210/head commit 2127f043a0f1eaf348d08bf4ed964eb8ea69ff41
Base revision: gcc/gcc ref trunk commit a5407eb736feab6e8778c0899fbf4626ee506a60 r17-2902-ga5407eb736feab
Merge base: a5407eb736feab6e8778c0899fbf4626ee506a60
Full diff url: https://forge.sourceware.org/gcc/gcc/pulls/210.diff
Discussion:  https://forge.sourceware.org/gcc/gcc/pulls/210
Requested Reviewers:

Record likely inactive email addresses for existing contributors.  These
addresses were collected from the author and committer fields in the Git
history, as well as from entries removed from earlier versions of the
MAINTAINERS file.  Addresses already listed as active are excluded.
These addresses are not printed on the MAINTAINERS file, they serve as an
archive to help match past contributions, specifically for users that have an
account on sourceware forge.

This is an initial version of the patch to gather input. Data used with
explicit permission.

ChangeLog:
	* MAINTAINERS.yml: Add inactive_email entries.
	* contrib/maintainer_utils.py: Add inactive_email property.


Changed files:
- M: MAINTAINERS.yml
- M: contrib/maintainer_utils.py


Claudio Bantaloukas (1):
  MAINTAINERS: Record old email addresses

 MAINTAINERS.yml             | 3 +++
 contrib/maintainer_utils.py | 7 +++++++
 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+)
  

Richard Earnshaw (rearnsha) <rearnsha@arm.com> approved the changes:
This seems reasonable to me - it's simply reformatting information already stored in the GCC repository.
OK, but please give it until Tuesday in case there are any last minute objections.


--
https://forge.sourceware.org/gcc/gcc/pulls/210#issuecomment-7089
  

Richard Earnshaw via Sourceware Forge wrote:
> Richard Earnshaw (rearnsha) <rearnsha@arm.com> approved the changes:
> This seems reasonable to me - it's simply reformatting information already stored in the GCC repository.
> OK, but please give it until Tuesday in case there are any last minute objections.

I think it is by itself a good idea – but I am not sure "inactive_email" 
is the right word. There is:

* Non-primary email addresses - like in my case, my private email.
   Still valid and with FSF assignment, but my work email is my
   primary one.
* Old email addresses due to company-name changes - still valid but
   not used for new new emails. (I have one of those too.)
* Old email addresses - not valid any more, usually because of
   changing companies.

I think inactive is fine for all of those, but we could also have
a non_primary one - esp. for some things, I might still use my
private email – which is would be more a non_primary_email than
inactive_email.

Tobias
  

On 07/08/2026 16:13, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> Richard Earnshaw via Sourceware Forge wrote:
>> Richard Earnshaw (rearnsha) <rearnsha@arm.com> approved the changes:
>> This seems reasonable to me - it's simply reformatting information already stored in the GCC repository.
>> OK, but please give it until Tuesday in case there are any last minute objections.
> 
> I think it is by itself a good idea – but I am not sure "inactive_email" is the right word. There is:
> 
> * Non-primary email addresses - like in my case, my private email.
>   Still valid and with FSF assignment, but my work email is my
>   primary one.
> * Old email addresses due to company-name changes - still valid but
>   not used for new new emails. (I have one of those too.)
> * Old email addresses - not valid any more, usually because of
>   changing companies.
> 
> I think inactive is fine for all of those, but we could also have
> a non_primary one - esp. for some things, I might still use my
> private email – which is would be more a non_primary_email than
> inactive_email.
> 
> Tobias
> 

The main email: entry is a list of valid email addresses that you have; the first is considered to be your primary email.

This is intended for 'dead' email addresses that will no-longer reach you (eg because you've changed employer, or ISP).  The forge can use this to identify some of your older commits as yours when it generates statistics.

R.
  

On Fri, Aug 07, 2026 at 05:13:41PM +0200, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> Richard Earnshaw via Sourceware Forge wrote:
> > Richard Earnshaw (rearnsha) <rearnsha@arm.com> approved the changes:
> > This seems reasonable to me - it's simply reformatting information already stored in the GCC repository.
> > OK, but please give it until Tuesday in case there are any last minute objections.
> 
> I think it is by itself a good idea – but I am not sure "inactive_email" is
> the right word. There is:
> 
> * Non-primary email addresses - like in my case, my private email.
>   Still valid and with FSF assignment, but my work email is my
>   primary one.
> * Old email addresses due to company-name changes - still valid but
>   not used for new new emails. (I have one of those too.)
> * Old email addresses - not valid any more, usually because of
>   changing companies.
> 
> I think inactive is fine for all of those, but we could also have
> a non_primary one - esp. for some things, I might still use my
> private email – which is would be more a non_primary_email than
> inactive_email.

I thought the first email in email: is the primary one, the others
in that array are non-primary but ones that are still supposed to work.
inactive_emails: are those that don't work anymore, from past companies
without forward mechanism, mail server which doesn't exist anymore,
email account removed, etc., i.e. something where you can't be reached
at, but still some commits in the repo are using that email.

	Jakub
  

On 07/08/2026 16:13, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> Richard Earnshaw via Sourceware Forge wrote:
>> Richard Earnshaw (rearnsha) <rearnsha@arm.com> approved the changes:
>> This seems reasonable to me - it's simply reformatting information 
>> already stored in the GCC repository.
>> OK, but please give it until Tuesday in case there are any last minute 
>> objections.
> 
> I think it is by itself a good idea – but I am not sure "inactive_email" 
> is the right word. There is:
> 
> * Non-primary email addresses - like in my case, my private email.
>    Still valid and with FSF assignment, but my work email is my
>    primary one.
> * Old email addresses due to company-name changes - still valid but
>    not used for new new emails. (I have one of those too.)
> * Old email addresses - not valid any more, usually because of
>    changing companies.
> 
> I think inactive is fine for all of those, but we could also have
> a non_primary one - esp. for some things, I might still use my
> private email – which is would be more a non_primary_email than
> inactive_email.
> 
In addition to what Richard and Jakub said, I will soon post a bigger 
patch with all the emails scraped.
There is no reasonable way to validate that each and every email out of 
the more than 600 that I found for people in MAINTAINERS is active or not.
So the best I can do is add the emails as inactive and let interested 
parties make changes as they see fit.

HTH
Claudio

> Tobias
>
  

Richard Earnshaw (foss) wrote:
> The main email: entry is a list of valid email addresses that you have; the first is considered to be your primary email. This is intended for 'dead' email addresses that will no-longer reach you (eg because you've changed employer, or ISP).
Makes sense.

However, a IMHO very useful follow-up patch would be to add a comment 
block on top of MAINTAINERS.yml that (a) lists all fields - and (b) 
actually documents what they are fore and, as applicable, which special 
values are valid.

Currently, one might just pick a previous item and modify it and, 
possibly, additionally read through contrib/maintainer_utils.py and 
through some emails. For instance, it is unlikely to find 
'inactive_email' - unless by chance, given that there only a single user 
that uses it (once this patch lands).

Tobias
  

On 07/08/2026 16:32, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> Richard Earnshaw (foss) wrote:
>> The main email: entry is a list of valid email addresses that you have; the first is considered to be your primary email. This is intended for 'dead' email addresses that will no-longer reach you (eg because you've changed employer, or ISP).
> Makes sense.
> 
> However, a IMHO very useful follow-up patch would be to add a comment block on top of MAINTAINERS.yml that (a) lists all fields - and (b) actually documents what they are fore and, as applicable, which special values are valid.
> 
> Currently, one might just pick a previous item and modify it and, possibly, additionally read through contrib/maintainer_utils.py and through some emails. For instance, it is unlikely to find 'inactive_email' - unless by chance, given that there only a single user that uses it (once this patch lands).
> 
> Tobias

We would need to change the yaml writer module in python if we wanted to do that.  Currently tools like contrib/add-write-after.py re-write the yaml file directly.  I believe it can be done, but not with the base, widely available, yaml writer module.

But we should certainly have a readme file that documents the structure of this file.

R.