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:   Mon, 22 Nov 2021 19:50:35 +0100
From:   Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@...mhuis.info>
To:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:     workflows@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Konstantin Ryabitsev <konstantin@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 1/1] docs: add the new commit-msg tags 'Reported:'
 and 'Reviewed:'

On 22.11.21 17:29, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Nov 2021 08:33:42 +0100
> Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@...mhuis.info> wrote:
> 
>> Introduce the tags 'Reported:' and 'Reviewed:' in addition to 'Link:',
>> as the latter is overloaded and hence doesn't indicate what the provided
>> URL is about. Documenting these also provides clarity, as a few
>> developers have used 'References:' to point to problem reports;
>> nevertheless 'Reported:' was chosen for this purpose, as it perfectly
>> matches up with the 'Reported-by:' tag commonly used already and needed
>> in this situation already.
> 
> I like the differences between "Reorted:" and "Reviewed:", although I may
> keep the "Link" instead of Reviewed because my automate scripts just give
> the link of the patch, and there's seldom a review attached to it :-/

/me wonders if "Merge Request:" would be a better tag, but at least for
now settles on 'it's nice, as it's close to what people are used from
git forges, but OTOH it somehow feels wrong'

> That said, I would like a way to have versions show a link to the last
> version that was reviewed.
> 
> v1: has no tags
> 
> v2: has a Reviewed: tag to v1.
> 
> v3: has a Reviewed: tag to v2
> 
> [...]
> 
> Then the final commit could have a "Link" or "Reviewed" tag to v3, even
> though there may not be any reviews to v3, but v3 has the link to v2, and
> v2 has the link to v1, etc.

Is that really worth it? Isn't it sufficient if the commit links to the
last public review posting, as that already should link to all earlier
review postings. Sure, not everybody is doing this right now, but maybe
just educating people to do so is better than creating something new.

Ciao, Thorsten

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ