[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191115150202.15208-1-erosca@de.adit-jv.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2019 16:02:02 +0100
From: Eugeniu Rosca <erosca@...adit-jv.com>
To: Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>, Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
CC: <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Eugeniu Rosca <erosca@...adit-jv.com>,
Eugeniu Rosca <roscaeugeniu@...il.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: [PATCH] checkpatch: whitelist Originally-by: signature
Oftentimes [1], the contributor would like to honor or give credits [2]
to somebody's original ideas in the submission/reviewing process. While
"Co-developed-by:" and "Suggested-by:" (currently whitelisted) could be
employed for this purpose, they are not ideal.
Below matrix attempts portraying/quantifying the subtle differences
between these signatures (subjective/oversimplified):
Helper signature Contribution "ownership"
None 100% Author
Suggested-by: X 80% Author / 20% "X"
Co-developed-by: X 50% Author / 50% "X"
Originally-by: X 20% Author / 80% "X"
[1] linux (v5.4-rc7) git log --oneline --grep Originally-by | wc -l
88
[2] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/alpine.DEB.2.21.1909261144250.5528@nanos.tec.linutronix.de/
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Eugeniu Rosca <erosca@...adit-jv.com>
---
scripts/checkpatch.pl | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
index 6fcc66afb088..e456aba12bd0 100755
--- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
+++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
@@ -486,6 +486,7 @@ our $signature_tags = qr{(?xi:
Reviewed-by:|
Reported-by:|
Suggested-by:|
+ Originally-by:|
To:|
Cc:
)};
--
2.24.0
Powered by blists - more mailing lists