Re: [PATCH] docs: submitting-patches: document the format for affiliation

[Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>]

On 05/02/2025 08:37, Yanteng Si wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 在 2025/2/4 01:46, Jakub Kicinski 写道:
>> Adding company name in round brackets to From/SoB lines
>> is fairly common, but I don't see it documented anywhere.
>> Every now and then people try to add the sponsorship lines
>> to the commit message, fun example from this merge window:
>>
>>    Sponsored by:   The FreeBSD Foundation
>>
>> from commit 2ce67f8bf1ce ("wifi: iwlwifi: mvm: fix iwl_ssid_exist()
>> check"). Better format would be:
>>
>>    Author: Miri Korenblit (FreeBSD Foundation) <...
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
>> ---
>> CC: corbet@lwn.net
>> CC: workflows@vger.kernel.org
>> CC: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org
>> ---
>>   Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst | 6 ++++++
>>   1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst b/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
>> index 8fdc0ef3e604..12ed28b3d113 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
>> +++ b/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
>> @@ -717,6 +717,12 @@ patch in the permanent changelog.  If the ``from`` line is missing,
>>   then the ``From:`` line from the email header will be used to determine
>>   the patch author in the changelog.
>>   
>> +The author may indicate their affiliation or the sponsor of the work
>> +by adding the name of an organization to the ``from`` and ``SoB`` lines,
>> +e.g.:
>> +
>> +	From: Patch Author (Company) <author@example.com>
>> +
> It looks great, but I'm a bit worried that it could be misused,
> which might cause trouble for some companies. Even without
> this patch, there's no way to prevent the misuse.
> Consider the following situation:
> 
> From: Yanteng Si (linux foundation) <si.yanteng@linux.dev>
> 
> Obviously, I'm not a member of the Linux Foundation.


Nothing stops you from doing this now, because mentioned format is
already accepted.

> 
> This might seem a bit absurd, but I think it could actually happen,
> especially with some driver code. Hardware manufacturers would
> prefer to upstream their code under the guidance of their companies,
> considering subsequent hardware iterations. However, if some
> enthusiasts pretend to be company employees, and the maintainer,
> trusting the tag, actively applies the patches, it could disrupt the
> rhythm of the hardware manufacturers and is not conducive to code
> maintenance in the long run.


We trust people, not companies, so I think it does not matter for the
trust what is written in ().


> 
> How about we add one more part: The organization name in
> the parentheses doesn't necessarily represent the developer's
> relationship with that organization, especially when it doesn't
> match the email domain name. Maintainers should be cautious
> and verify carefully before applying patches.

Sorry, but how? First, maintainers have already a lot on their plate and
you want to ask them to do some more checks? And how would these checks
look like? Shall I ask people to give me certificates of employement or
their contracts?

The original Jakub's text is quite clear and does not mean AT ALL that
developer represents organisation.


Best regards,
Krzysztof