| 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, 01 Apr 2024 08:17:03 +0300 From: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org> To: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net> Cc: workflows@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org> Subject: [PATCH] docs: submitting-patches: describe additional tags Described tags do not fully cover development needs. For example the LKP robot insists on using Reported-by: tag, but that's not fully correct. The robot reports an issue with the patch, not the issue that is being fixed by the patch. Describe additional tags to be used while submitting patches. Signed-off-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org> --- Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst | 19 +++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+) diff --git a/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst b/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst index 66029999b587..3a24d90fa385 100644 --- a/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst +++ b/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst @@ -544,6 +544,25 @@ future patches, and ensures credit for the testers. Reviewed-by:, instead, indicates that the patch has been reviewed and found acceptable according to the Reviewer's Statement: +Additional tags to be used while submitting patches +--------------------------------------------------- + +The tags described previously do not always cover the needs of the development +process. + +For example, if the kernel test robot reports an issue in the patch, the robot +insists that the next version of the patch gets the Reported-by: and Closes: +tags. While the Closes: tag can be considered correct in such a case, the +Reported-by: tag is definitely not correct. The LKP robot hasn't reported the +issue that is being fixed by the patch, but instead it has reported an issue +with the patch. To be more precise you may use the Improved-thanks-to: tag for +the next version of the patch. + +Another frequent case is when you want to express gratitude to the colleagues, +who helped to improve the patch, but neither the Co-developed-by: nor +Suggested-by: tags are appropriate. In such case you might prefer to use +Discussed-with:, Listened-by:, or Discussed-over-a-beer-with: tags. + Reviewer's statement of oversight ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ --- base-commit: 13ee4a7161b6fd938aef6688ff43b163f6d83e37 change-id: 20240401-additional-trailers-2b764f3e4aee Best regards, -- Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists