[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <edd0d5ec-b85a-9351-3614-adea369372e2@infradead.org>
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2018 09:29:05 -0800
From: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>,
Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] doc: process: Add "Root-caused-by" and "Suggested-by"
On 02/21/2018 10:03 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 8:43 PM, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org> wrote:
>> On 02/21/2018 04:37 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
>>> As recently pointed out by Linus, "Root-caused-by" is a good tag to include
>>> since it can indicate significantly more work than "just" a Reported-by.
>>> This adds it and "Suggested-by" (which was also missing) to the documented
>>> list of tags. Additionally updates checkpatch.pl to match the process docs.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
>>> ---
>>> Documentation/process/5.Posting.rst | 7 +++++++
>>> scripts/checkpatch.pl | 2 ++
>>> 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+)
>>
>> I would still rather see Co-developed-by: in both the docs and in checkpatch. :(
>
> Hm? It is in docs. This syncs the process doc to checkpatch...
Yes, I understand that. I'm just saying that it's "wrong" in both places.
--
~Randy
Powered by blists - more mailing lists