From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97964C3DA66 for ; Wed, 23 Aug 2023 23:20:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S238488AbjHWXTt (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Aug 2023 19:19:49 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:49738 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S238179AbjHWXTZ (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Aug 2023 19:19:25 -0400 Received: from smtpcmd12131.aruba.it (smtpcmd12131.aruba.it [62.149.156.131]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DF16310C1 for ; Wed, 23 Aug 2023 16:19:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.50.162] ([146.241.122.243]) by Aruba Outgoing Smtp with ESMTPSA id Yx89qku9EgpIyYx89qIqzt; Thu, 24 Aug 2023 01:19:18 +0200 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=aruba.it; s=a1; t=1692832758; bh=xQTbOVG87TK9JPqsKuzRZJRYGXmtTFs9rbM9Q0xQjtY=; h=Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:From:Content-Type; b=PxddRZU0GUt1fBjLGV0hlO/shNw6wr3jPLezBDiPcV+WC1ZEyhcWF4cd3zK4XshLc w6dv7WfIEfnR0Aqqg+czCOCfl7sPCH+i4Zubxc+XKd7Kyu9lBhPJYDwmN+W3S1zgIh /GVxlCoU9rG7QfCsBfgGTd9PVbM7JH+TM8QdEjn44IyDZNEkbvn1TbX1aakIaCQxzm wjx4EIVeHG/UxzK9jP5lpphGTEQW6L3j5JyyoomonWT3v6geeL37cgoYNOuwBXQ4Rp 6VIph5dabEuXLzWqF235gGUVcrrApeH3xBU39CyexDGz3ccE9DTW0TaLhpWCefjP9v N/ssxNs0oy25g== Message-ID: <8ebb9e45-a69e-783b-3c93-30a7c27bdbc6@benettiengineering.com> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2023 01:19:15 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.14.0 Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/1] docs: submitting-patches: Add Sponsored-by tag to give credits to who sponsored the patch Content-Language: en-US To: Geert Uytterhoeven Cc: Laurent Pinchart , Jonathan Corbet , workflows@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20230817220957.41582-1-giulio.benetti@benettiengineering.com> <20230817220957.41582-2-giulio.benetti@benettiengineering.com> <20230817232348.GC1175@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> <28289906-4fd1-26aa-b1c4-eb393ac52d48@benettiengineering.com> From: Giulio Benetti In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4xfJWR0OmGkhmDtClfBYYvNLsTPkH9pYsZ6wtECtnDH4auxntA/aai4Q8AFi8QazHctJVaXV0QSlDams1ArtAuMQViNxX25Tt/NmdYP4zOsBefVD2GbTi2 +2+LptVPzOkSCRtaDFJ9LfemY1Jv7dUKZstNlHg5/YGT9BR0l0YDovRLUFchbnayk7M4A+6adjyiYsiBRct+zldr/+SfrH0Rm+tigfGxlNHHtkQiUQoLqI4B kiob6b7VPSJIq+38UzoVimYpt8/vbyx9ncVEE0i1vopv1fgSd6GwVV7o/9FkcE2BSsngPLejOT3JOW0AozaoEzCXO6oBBGBGblgWQSKfvRWeZpeMflmGTdhA QYZ01YUDcuskSmU/ZbDehjYx+5zjJ40QCGFJq0lIwKGPMDbpzIsaE6jXOnbP/nS8LUrUxnF1 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: workflows@vger.kernel.org Hello Geert, All, On 21/08/23 09:40, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Hi Giulio, > > On Sun, Aug 20, 2023 at 2:35 AM Giulio Benetti > wrote: >> On 18/08/23 01:23, Laurent Pinchart wrote: >>> On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 12:09:57AM +0200, Giulio Benetti wrote: >>>> Sometimes it happens that a Company or a Physical Person sponsors the >>>> creation and/or the upstreaming process of a patch, but at the moment >>>> there is no way to give credits to it. There are some commit that include >>>> a sort of tag "Sponsored by" without the dash to avoid >>>> scripts/checkpatch.pl to complain but a real standard has not been defined. >>>> With this patch let's try to define a method to give credits consistently >>>> including an acknowledge from the sponsor. The goal is to improve >>>> contributions from companies or physical persons that this way should gain >>>> visibility in Linux kernel and so they should be more prone to let the >>>> work done for them for to be upstreamed. >>> >>> Just adding one data point here, without judging on the merits of this >>> proposal. I've been requested previously by customers to increase their >>> visibility in the kernel development statistics, and the way we found to >>> do so was to sign-off patches with >>> >>> Laurent Pinchart >>> >>> (where "customer" is to be replaced with the customer name). >> >> this approach works good for the developer because of the +customer >> mailbox capability but in term of appeal for the final customer I've >> been told(by the customer) he would really like more the "Sponsored-by:" >> way. To tell the truth while I was looking for an existing alternative >> I've found the commits with "Sponsored by:" pseudo-tag that look cooler. >> >> This is my taste of course and the taste of one of my customers, but >> to me it's like having a brand shown: >> Sponsored-by: Sponsoring Company >> vs: >> Signed-off-by: Giulio Benetti >> > > Personally, I would respond "I'm sorry, but the only advertising > space we offer are Copyright headers (for employees) and > "user+customer@..." or "name (customer) user@..." (for contractors). This is a good answer. So these are the 2 possible ways to give credits to sponsors. Does it make sense if I send a patch describing exactly this? This is because my finding was only "Sponsored by" that looked good to me. So I can avoid other possible pain for the future. > And this is a separate tag, so it's harder for the analysis tools > (whose output your customers must be interested in, too?) to > match the tag to the actual Author/Reviewer/... Right >> If I am the customer I'd really prefer the first option. > > You are aware this will cause lots of work for the customer, too? > (See below). [ SNIP ] >>>> +In both cases, to prevent fake credits, either the company or the person should >>>> +send an Acked-by tag placed right under Sponsored-by tag using the same form >>>> +described above. So for example if the patch contains:: >>>> + >>>> + >>>> + >>>> + Sponsored-by: Company Name >>>> + Signed-off-by: Developer Name >>>> + >>>> +The result including the answer from the sponsor must be:: >>>> + >>>> + >>>> + >>>> + Sponsored-by: Company Name >>>> + Acked-by: Company Name >>>> + Signed-off-by: Developer Name >>>> + >>>> +This way the sponsor agrees to the usage of this tag using its name. > > This is also causing more work for maintainers: now they have to check > if any Sponsored-by tags are present, and track if there is a response > with a matching Acked-by tag... > > And obviously they should postpone applying the patch until a > confirmation response is sent... which may never happen... Yes it came into my mind and I wanted to rely only on DCO dropping the part of acked-by tag. But there are too many cons for Sponsored-by approach. So I will go for one of the 2 ways I've been pointed. Thank you Best regards -- Giulio Benetti CEO&CTO@Benetti Engineering sas