From: Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com>
To: Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com>
Cc: Andy Whitcroft <apw@canonical.com>, Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>,
Dwaipayan Ray <dwaipayanray1@gmail.com>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
workflows@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: allow tags between co-developed-by and their sign-off
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2023 16:16:55 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAKXUXMyOk+06ZRc7gvYMA=KHvZZp1FXiCJC5Tp9M=SUQfQnBVQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231023102846.14830-1-przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com>
Hi Przemek,
On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 12:29 PM Przemek Kitszel
<przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com> wrote:
>
> Allow additional tags between Co-developed-by: and Signed-off-by:.
>
> Removing the "immediately" word from the doc is a great summary of the
> change - there is no need for the two tags to be glued together, barring
> ease of checkpatch implementation.
>
I think the currently suggested process of keeping Co-developed-by and
Signed-off-by glued together is good, and I see no reason why this
should be changed, nor do I see any drawbacks.
> Additional tags between Co-developed-by and corresponding Signed-off-by
> could include Reviewed-by tags collected by Submitter, which is also
> a Co-developer, but should sign-off at the very end of tags provided by
> the Submitter.
>
The other tags, Reviewed-by, etc., can go anywhere just not between
Co-developed-by and corresponding Signed-off-by. So, why do you have
this need to put it exactly there rather than putting it anywhere
else?
The commit message tells me what you are proposing, but there is no
rationale in the commit message and that is put up for discussion here
with the proposed change.
I see many potential areas of work for the checkpatch script, but in
my humble opinion, this really is not one of the rules that needs to
be improved.
Lukas
(...snipped the rest...)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-23 14:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-10-23 10:28 Przemek Kitszel
2023-10-23 14:02 ` Sean Christopherson
2023-10-24 9:15 ` Przemek Kitszel
2023-10-29 9:35 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2023-10-30 9:05 ` Przemek Kitszel
2023-10-23 14:16 ` Lukas Bulwahn [this message]
2023-10-23 14:25 ` Joe Perches
2023-10-24 9:15 ` Przemek Kitszel
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='CAKXUXMyOk+06ZRc7gvYMA=KHvZZp1FXiCJC5Tp9M=SUQfQnBVQ@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com \
--cc=apw@canonical.com \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=dwaipayanray1@gmail.com \
--cc=jacob.e.keller@intel.com \
--cc=joe@perches.com \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=workflows@vger.kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox