linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Documentation: SubmittingPatches: Add note about Reviewed-by tags

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 12 Feb 2016 10:24:48 -0800
From:	Markus Mayer <markus.mayer@...adcom.com>
To:	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
	corbet@....net, bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Documentation: SubmittingPatches: Add note about
 Reviewed-by tags

For some odd reason, the first version of this e-mail had an HTML part
and got rejected from the lists. My apologies for the extra e-mail.

On 11 February 2016 at 18:12, Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com> wrote:
> As is now common in a lot of organization having an internal code review
> process (be it through Gerritt or other tools), patches extracted from
> this review process and submitted to public mailing-lists will have
> pre-existing Reviewed-by tags. Add a note about why these tags exists,
> and what a maintainer could be doing with those. Some maintainers did
> complain before that these tags had to be added when the patches get
> submitted to the public, while some just ignored and took the patches
> as-is.
>
> Signed-off-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
> ---
>  Documentation/SubmittingPatches | 8 ++++++++
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/SubmittingPatches b/Documentation/SubmittingPatches
> index d603fa078235..b1b8e39bc5ee 100644
> --- a/Documentation/SubmittingPatches
> +++ b/Documentation/SubmittingPatches
> @@ -582,6 +582,14 @@ reviewers and to inform maintainers of the degree of review which has been
>  done on the patch.  Reviewed-by: tags, when supplied by reviewers known to
>  understand the subject area and to perform thorough reviews, will normally
>  increase the likelihood of your patch getting into the kernel.
> +The presence of Reviewed-by tags for an initial patch submission are indicative
> +of an existing internal review process that may occur at various organizations,
> +prior to a mainline kernel submission.  The presence of these tags can give the
> +maintainer a good appreciation that somebody has done an internal review
> +following the same guidelines as those done on a public mailing-list.
> +Maintainers are encouraged to maintain these tags while accepting and merging
> +patches, appreciation of these pre-existing Revivewed-by tags is left are their
> +own discretion.

Some nit-picking on the last sentence. How about:

While maintainers are encouraged to maintain these tags when accepting
and merging patches, appreciation of these pre-existing Reviewed-by
tags is left at their own discretion.

There's also a typo in "Reviewed-by" in the original sentence.

>  A Suggested-by: tag indicates that the patch idea is suggested by the person
>  named and ensures credit to the person for the idea. Please note that this
> --
> 2.1.0
>