From: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
To: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"Tobin C . Harding" <me@tobin.cc>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>,
Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz <jorge.ramirez-ortiz@linaro.org>,
Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] docs: Clarify the usage and sign-off requirements for Co-developed-by
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2019 10:13:44 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190322171344.GC12666@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0f4538aa6a91c071f6e590c2d3f60a474b14fab5.camel@perches.com>
On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 10:03:07AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Fri, 2019-03-22 at 08:57 -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > The documentation for Co-developed-by is a bit light on details, e.g. it
> > doesn't explicitly state that:
> >
> > - Multiple Co-developed-by tags are perfectly acceptable
> > - Co-developed-by and Signed-off-by must be paired together
> > - SOB ordering should still follow standard sign-off procedure
> >
> > Lack of explicit direction has resulted in developers taking a variety
> > of approaches, often lacking any intent whatsoever, e.g. scattering SOBs
> > willy-nilly, collecting them all at the end or the beginning, etc...
> > Tweak the wording to make it clear that multiple co-authors are allowed,
> > and document the expectation that standard sign-off procedures are to
> > be followed.
> >
> > The use of "original author" has also led to confusion as many patches
> > don't have just one "original" author, e.g. when multiple developers
> > are involved from the genesis of the patch. Remove all usage of
> > "original" and instead call out that Co-developed-by is simply a way to
> > provide attribution in addition to the From tag, i.e. neither tag is
> > intended to imply anything with regard to who did what.
> >
> > Provide examples to (hopefully) eliminate any ambiguity.
>
> Please add the checkpatch bit to this at the same time.
Doh, spaced on that. I'll wait for additional feedback before sending v5.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-03-22 17:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-03-22 15:57 [PATCH v4] docs: Clarify the usage and sign-off requirements for Co-developed-by Sean Christopherson
2019-03-22 17:03 ` Joe Perches
2019-03-22 17:13 ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
2019-03-22 17:56 ` Niklas Cassel
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190322171344.GC12666@linux.intel.com \
--to=sean.j.christopherson@intel.com \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jani.nikula@linux.intel.com \
--cc=jic23@kernel.org \
--cc=joe@perches.com \
--cc=jorge.ramirez-ortiz@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=me@tobin.cc \
--cc=niklas.cassel@linaro.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.