linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] Documentation: process: Avoid unneeded Cc: tags

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]

Message-ID: <9280849e-9c56-43ad-9488-1bb231716c73@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2024 09:37:07 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
 workflows@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] Documentation: process: Avoid unneeded Cc: tags

On 23/04/2024 15:19, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> Add a note that explains that  Cc: email header is implied by other
> tags, such as Reviewed-by:. In this case an explicit Cc: is _not_
> needed.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
> ---
>  Documentation/process/5.Posting.rst          | 4 +++-
>  Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst | 5 ++++-
>  2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/process/5.Posting.rst b/Documentation/process/5.Posting.rst
> index de4edd42d5c0..90a7fe2a85f2 100644
> --- a/Documentation/process/5.Posting.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/process/5.Posting.rst
> @@ -267,7 +267,9 @@ The tags in common use are:
>     being reported.
>  
>   - Cc: the named person received a copy of the patch and had the
> -   opportunity to comment on it.
> +   opportunity to comment on it. Note that other formal tags are automatically
> +   converted to the ``Cc:`` email header and you do not need to have an
> +   explicit Cc: tag, if the person is already mentioned by another tag.
>  
>  Be careful in the addition of tags to your patches, as only Cc: is appropriate
>  for addition without the explicit permission of the person named; using
> diff --git a/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst b/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
> index 66029999b587..6775f0698136 100644
> --- a/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
> @@ -486,7 +486,10 @@ provided such comments, you may optionally add a ``Cc:`` tag to the patch.
>  This is the only tag which might be added without an explicit action by the
>  person it names - but it should indicate that this person was copied on the
>  patch.  This tag documents that potentially interested parties
> -have been included in the discussion.
> +have been included in the discussion. Note that other formal tags are
> +automatically converted to the Cc: email header and you do not need to
> +have an explicit ``Cc:`` tag, if the person is already mentioned by another
> +tag.

It depends on the tool. b4 and git-send-email do it, but other might not
(e.g. quilt?). Anyway, to me this is obvious and submitting-patches is
already way too long, so I would just keep it in the "5.Posting", but
not here.


Best regards,
Krzysztof