Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 24 Oct 2023 11:15:48 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: allow tags between co-developed-by and their sign-off | From | Przemek Kitszel <> |
| |
On 10/23/23 16:16, Lukas Bulwahn wrote: > Hi Przemek, > > On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 12:29 PM Przemek Kitszel > <przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com> wrote: >> >> Allow additional tags between Co-developed-by: and Signed-off-by:. >> >> Removing the "immediately" word from the doc is a great summary of the >> change - there is no need for the two tags to be glued together, barring >> ease of checkpatch implementation. >> > > I think the currently suggested process of keeping Co-developed-by and > Signed-off-by glued together is good, and I see no reason why this > should be changed, nor do I see any drawbacks. > > >> Additional tags between Co-developed-by and corresponding Signed-off-by >> could include Reviewed-by tags collected by Submitter, which is also >> a Co-developer, but should sign-off at the very end of tags provided by >> the Submitter. >> > > The other tags, Reviewed-by, etc., can go anywhere just not between > Co-developed-by and corresponding Signed-off-by. So, why do you have > this need to put it exactly there rather than putting it anywhere > else?
Multiple times during review it was odd for me to look at thw SoB of submitter not being the last thing, and that's the result of the current rule - co-dev authors put collected RB as last thing, only to keep their CdB and SoB together.
> > The commit message tells me what you are proposing, but there is no > rationale in the commit message and that is put up for discussion here > with the proposed change. > > I see many potential areas of work for the checkpatch script, but in > my humble opinion, this really is not one of the rules that needs to > be improved.
I started the other way, identified what was pissing me off, then tried to fix that, despite of requirement of writing in perl.
> > Lukas > > (...snipped the rest...)
| |