so that the subsystems are all on one line, and then pulling out the first entry, to get the most specific subsystem.
My concern with this approach is that it might turn out to be like how we end up writing descriptions for source pacakges in our USNs via the package_info_overrides.json file, because the description summaryies in the debian pacakges are not always ina state usable for general public consumption. My experiments with some sample files are okay, but there are things like:
Apologies, I haven't look at the details of the merge proposal very closely.
Using get_maintainer.pl would be ideal, and perhaps you'd wnat to use something like following to simplify parsing the output:
./scripts/ get_maintainer. pl --separator ':' --subsystem [...]
so that the subsystems are all on one line, and then pulling out the first entry, to get the most specific subsystem.
My concern with this approach is that it might turn out to be like how we end up writing descriptions for source pacakges in our USNs via the package_ info_overrides. json file, because the description summaryies in the debian pacakges are not always ina state usable for general public consumption. My experiments with some sample files are okay, but there are things like:
$ ./scripts/ get_maintainer. pl --separator ':' --subsystem drivers/ md/dm-ioctl. c | tail -1
DEVICE-MAPPER (LVM):THE REST
and
$ ./scripts/ get_maintainer. pl --separator \; --subsystem -f drivers/ net/dsa/ vitesse- vsc73xx- core.c | tail -1
NETWORKING [DSA];NETWORKING DRIVERS;THE REST
so at a minimum, we might want an override mechanism anyway.