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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2020 01:05:49 -0700 From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> To: Dwaipayan Ray <dwaipayanray1@...il.com> Cc: linux-kernel-mentees@...ts.linuxfoundation.org, Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] checkpatch: add new warnings to author signoff checks. On Mon, 2020-10-05 at 13:10 +0530, Dwaipayan Ray wrote: > On Mon, Oct 5, 2020 at 12:48 PM Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> wrote: > > On Mon, 2020-10-05 at 12:18 +0530, Dwaipayan Ray wrote: > > > The author signed-off-by checks are currently very vague. > > > Cases like same name or same address are not handled separately. [] > > And for mismatches, it's really not known that > > it should be one way or the or the other is it? > > > > I think that's true. But since the mail in the > From: part is the one which with others are being > compared, I think maybe it should have the higher > priority, and be treated as the expected one. I rather expect it to be the other way around. The Signed-off-by: line should be authoritative as that is what is put in the commit log.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists