From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from box.trvn.ru (box.trvn.ru [194.87.146.52]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F0666C129; Mon, 1 Apr 2024 16:19:48 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=194.87.146.52 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1711988392; cv=none; b=iClr+h4tRDmWFE/5FeGmvNncNN275cNvCLSa5LzNZ4g6tcT4FZWX2L/Y2x9ZgFkaRpSremne/0BnTgqbhHh9InuitoscV93SK43bA0eFMtDmJg3P6C84P0bhHQgOnhdxu0pN6tUm+lv7rFjo6entS1VaO/ZUIq4e5RKNC2xOAxE= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1711988392; c=relaxed/simple; bh=mR/cOeAw4E7C++Ggf0FcfRIhKkLkJCA2eKgJ7ORve1k=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=dvOEz5wUMf/jOdQFVgfHA6FrEnYPcUDtQnYppoDgBee7s8ORGselIOFlOAMuqyE+pk54S9JEAjHgMaAvQpmsi5O/GWxlyO2RtRq8PRw8sLswU8luy/P/nnlkbDycJP2d2Z20Riqk797aS3+UbVlNtKLSgy7spd4/DNeoFKPFNXY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=trvn.ru; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=trvn.ru; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=trvn.ru header.i=@trvn.ru header.b=Eojp17Uj; arc=none smtp.client-ip=194.87.146.52 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=trvn.ru Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=trvn.ru Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=trvn.ru header.i=@trvn.ru header.b="Eojp17Uj" Received: from authenticated-user (box.trvn.ru [194.87.146.52]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by box.trvn.ru (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8EC74401B8; Mon, 1 Apr 2024 21:19:39 +0500 (+05) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=trvn.ru; s=mail; t=1711988380; bh=mR/cOeAw4E7C++Ggf0FcfRIhKkLkJCA2eKgJ7ORve1k=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=Eojp17Ujo/uMpf1fwFbzjNhysujUbTNg10EALJdjfAVRyC5AVKkKURjF5xuKJv9vf FEVsiPPAT63k0DW5SMMjWK6EeW4DQBySzJ4zD5L76TzKckXGw+A4i8g7kTkLdEliOu ShR9wGrQxaSd+9o7/R4cIn08s/SKudbqSh/u+rZMpp1WwkPj5qHsQs2f3UCauExHSA AQWtOEP000HS9JfmwiXwxBp3NdbrJItZYSl6zZ/FljI9G3IPwiK7PeH8FDxgr7IJJr yx0RdOhAYpu2qJ79AJIAIVl0YgpYH7/No5LYU8uhr/SOdqdOe1/SYiiCxMKx9bPt31 jhf9PBM8g9bqA== Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2024 21:19:36 +0500 From: Nikita Travkin To: Dmitry Baryshkov Cc: Jonathan Corbet , workflows@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] docs: submitting-patches: describe additional tags Message-ID: References: <20240401-additional-trailers-v1-1-f472bf158d2f@linaro.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: workflows@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20240401-additional-trailers-v1-1-f472bf158d2f@linaro.org> On Mon, Apr 01, 2024 at 08:17:03AM +0300, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > Described tags do not fully cover development needs. For example the LKP > robot insists on using Reported-by: tag, but that's not fully correct. > The robot reports an issue with the patch, not the issue that is being > fixed by the patch. Describe additional tags to be used while submitting > patches. > > Signed-off-by: Dmitry Baryshkov > --- > Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst | 19 +++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst b/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst > index 66029999b587..3a24d90fa385 100644 > --- a/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst > +++ b/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst > @@ -544,6 +544,25 @@ future patches, and ensures credit for the testers. > Reviewed-by:, instead, indicates that the patch has been reviewed and found > acceptable according to the Reviewer's Statement: > > +Additional tags to be used while submitting patches > +--------------------------------------------------- > + > +The tags described previously do not always cover the needs of the development > +process. > + > +For example, if the kernel test robot reports an issue in the patch, the robot > +insists that the next version of the patch gets the Reported-by: and Closes: > +tags. While the Closes: tag can be considered correct in such a case, the > +Reported-by: tag is definitely not correct. The LKP robot hasn't reported the > +issue that is being fixed by the patch, but instead it has reported an issue > +with the patch. To be more precise you may use the Improved-thanks-to: tag for > +the next version of the patch. > + > +Another frequent case is when you want to express gratitude to the colleagues, > +who helped to improve the patch, but neither the Co-developed-by: nor > +Suggested-by: tags are appropriate. In such case you might prefer to use > +Discussed-with:, Listened-by:, or Discussed-over-a-beer-with: tags. > + This is an amazing idea! Though I wonder if we should use the industry standard X- prefix for those: i.e. X-Code-generator: or X-Sent-some-messages-about-this-that-were-left-unread-to: to clarify they are extensions to the usual workflow. I think the decision on this would be pretty obvious after reading the current recommendation for X- prefixes in RFC 6648. I like this change! Nikita > Reviewer's statement of oversight > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > > --- > base-commit: 13ee4a7161b6fd938aef6688ff43b163f6d83e37 > change-id: 20240401-additional-trailers-2b764f3e4aee > > Best regards, > -- > Dmitry Baryshkov