Currently, checkpatch.pl warns for BAD_SIGN_OFF on non-standard signature
styles.
This warning occurs because of incorrect use of signature tags,
e.g. an evaluation on v4.13..v5.8 showed the use of following incorrect
signature tags, which may seem correct, but are not standard:
1) Requested-by (count: 48) => Suggested-by
Rationale: In an open-source project, there are no 'requests', just
'suggestions' to convince a maintainer to accept your patch
2) Co-authored-by (count: 43) => Co-developed-by
Rationale: Co-developed-by and Co-authored-by are synonyms
3) Analyzed-by (count: 22) / Analysed-by (count: 5) => Co-developed-by
Rationale: Analyzing is a part of Software Development, so
'Co-developed-by' is perfectly fine, even if contributor did not create
code
4) Improvements-by (count: 19) => Co-developed-by
5) Noticed-by (count: 11) => Reported-by
6) Inspired-by (count: 11) => Suggested-by
7) Verified-by (count: 8) => Tested-by
Rationale: Used by a single user. On reading mailing list, it seems
Tested-by might be a suitable alternative
8) Okay-ished-by (count: 8) => Acked-by
Rationale: Used by a single user. On reading mailing list, it seems
Acked-by must be suitable alternative
9) Acked-for-MFD-by (count: 6) => Acked-by
10) Reviewed-off-by (count: 5) => Reviewed-by
11) Proposed-by (count: 5) => Suggested-by
Rationale: On observing the mailing list, this tag is always used for a
maintainer. It seems that the changes might have been suggested by them
and the tag is used as acknowledgment for the same
12) Fixed-by (count: 3) => Co-developed-by
Rationale: Fixing bug is a part of Software Development, so
'Co-developed-by' is perfectly fine, even if contributor did not create
code
13) Pointed-out-by (count: 3) / Pointed-at-by (count: 2) => Suggested-by
Rationale: The tags are used for maintainers. It seems that the changes
might have been suggested by them and the tag is used as acknowledgment
for the same
E.g., Pointed-at-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>
14) Suggestions-by (count: 3) => Suggested-by
15) Generated-by (count: 17) => remove the tag
On observing the mailing list, this tag is always used for quoting the
tool or script, which might have been used to generate the patch.
E.g. Generated-by: scripts/coccinelle/api/alloc/kzalloc-simple.cocci
16) Celebrated-by (count: 3) => remove the tag
This tag was used for only one commit. On observing mailing list, it seem
like the celebration for a particular patch and changes.
Provide a fix by:
1) replacing the non-standard signature with its standard equivalent
2) removing the signature if it is not required
Also, improve warning messages correspondingly, providing users
suggestions to either replace or remove the signature. Also provide
suitable rationale to the user for the suggestion made.
Signed-off-by: Aditya Srivastava <[email protected]>
---
changes in v2: replace commit specific example with brief evaluation
changes in v3: provide rationale to users for every signature tag suggestion;
modify commit message describing arrival to conclusion in a structured way
scripts/checkpatch.pl | 101 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 99 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
index fdfd5ec09be6..f402c9c3958f 100755
--- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
+++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
@@ -506,6 +506,81 @@ our $signature_tags = qr{(?xi:
Cc:
)};
+our %standard_signature_fix = (
+ "Requested-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Suggested-by:",
+ rationale => "In an open-source project, there are no 'requests', just 'suggestions' to convince a maintainer to accept your patch",
+ },
+ "Co-authored-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Co-developed-by:",
+ rationale => "Co-developed-by and Co-authored-by are synonyms",
+ },
+ "Analyzed-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Co-developed-by:",
+ rationale => "Analyzing is a part of Software Development, so 'Co-developed-by' is perfectly fine, even if contributor did not create code",
+ },
+ "Analysed-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Co-developed-by:",
+ rationale => "Analysing is a part of Software Development, so 'Co-developed-by' is perfectly fine, even if contributor did not create code",
+ },
+ "Improvements-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Co-developed-by:",
+ rationale => "Performing improvements are a part of Software Development, so 'Co-developed-by' is perfectly fine, even if contributor did not create code",
+ },
+ "Noticed-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Reported-by:",
+ rationale => "Reported-by and Noticed-by are synonyms",
+ },
+ "Inspired-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Suggested-by:",
+ rationale => "Suggested-by is the standard signature tag for acknowledging user for their suggestions",
+ },
+ "Verified-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Tested-by:",
+ rationale => "Tested-by and Verified-by are synonyms",
+ },
+ "Okay-ished-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Acked-by:",
+ rationale => "Acked-by is the standard signature tag for recording your approval",
+ },
+ "Acked-for-MFD-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Acked-by:",
+ rationale => "Acked-by is the standard signature tag for recording your approval",
+ },
+ "Reviewed-off-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Reviewed-by:",
+ rationale => "Reviewed-by is the standard signature tag for recording your approval",
+ },
+ "Proposed-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Suggested-by:",
+ rationale => "Proposing changes is same as suggesting changes, so Suggested-by seems perfectly fine",
+ },
+ "Fixed-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Co-developed-by:",
+ rationale => "Fixing bug is a part of Software Development, so 'Co-developed-by' is perfectly fine, even if contributor did not create code",
+ },
+ "Pointed-out-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Suggested-by:",
+ rationale => "Pointing out certain changes is synonymous to suggesting changes, so Suggested-by seems perfectly fine",
+ },
+ "Pointed-at-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Suggested-by:",
+ rationale => "Pointing at certain changes is synonymous to suggesting changes, so Suggested-by seems perfectly fine",
+ },
+ "Suggestions-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Suggested-by:",
+ rationale => "Suggested-by is the standard signature tag for acknowledging user for their suggestions",
+ },
+ "Generated-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "remove",
+ rationale => "Signature tags are used to acknowledge users for their contributions. It is advised to describe about tools in commit description instead",
+ },
+ "Celebrated-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "remove",
+ rationale => "Signature tags are used to acknowledge users for their contributions. This tag may not be required at all",
+ },
+);
+
our @typeListMisordered = (
qr{char\s+(?:un)?signed},
qr{int\s+(?:(?:un)?signed\s+)?short\s},
@@ -2773,8 +2848,30 @@ sub process {
my $ucfirst_sign_off = ucfirst(lc($sign_off));
if ($sign_off !~ /$signature_tags/) {
- WARN("BAD_SIGN_OFF",
- "Non-standard signature: $sign_off\n" . $herecurr);
+ my $suggested_signature = "";
+ my $rationale = "";
+ if (exists($standard_signature_fix{$sign_off})) {
+ $suggested_signature = $standard_signature_fix{$sign_off}{'suggestion'};
+ $rationale = $standard_signature_fix{$sign_off}{'rationale'};
+ }
+ if ($suggested_signature eq "") {
+ WARN("BAD_SIGN_OFF",
+ "Non-standard signature: $sign_off\n" . $herecurr);
+ }
+ elsif ($suggested_signature eq "remove") {
+ if (WARN("BAD_SIGN_OFF",
+ "Non-standard signature: $sign_off. Please consider removing this signature tag. $rationale\n" . $herecurr) &&
+ $fix) {
+ fix_delete_line($fixlinenr, $rawline);
+ }
+ }
+ else {
+ if (WARN("BAD_SIGN_OFF",
+ "Non-standard signature: $sign_off. Please use '$suggested_signature' instead. $rationale\n" . $herecurr) &&
+ $fix) {
+ $fixed[$fixlinenr] =~ s/$sign_off/$suggested_signature/;
+ }
+ }
}
if (defined $space_before && $space_before ne "") {
if (WARN("BAD_SIGN_OFF",
--
2.17.1
On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 4:04 PM Aditya Srivastava <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Currently, checkpatch.pl warns for BAD_SIGN_OFF on non-standard signature
> styles.
>
> This warning occurs because of incorrect use of signature tags,
> e.g. an evaluation on v4.13..v5.8 showed the use of following incorrect
> signature tags, which may seem correct, but are not standard:
>
> 1) Requested-by (count: 48) => Suggested-by
> Rationale: In an open-source project, there are no 'requests', just
> 'suggestions' to convince a maintainer to accept your patch
>
> 2) Co-authored-by (count: 43) => Co-developed-by
> Rationale: Co-developed-by and Co-authored-by are synonyms
>
> 3) Analyzed-by (count: 22) / Analysed-by (count: 5) => Co-developed-by
> Rationale: Analyzing is a part of Software Development, so
> 'Co-developed-by' is perfectly fine, even if contributor did not create
> code
>
> 4) Improvements-by (count: 19) => Co-developed-by
>
> 5) Noticed-by (count: 11) => Reported-by
>
> 6) Inspired-by (count: 11) => Suggested-by
>
> 7) Verified-by (count: 8) => Tested-by
> Rationale: Used by a single user. On reading mailing list, it seems
> Tested-by might be a suitable alternative
>
> 8) Okay-ished-by (count: 8) => Acked-by
> Rationale: Used by a single user. On reading mailing list, it seems
> Acked-by must be suitable alternative
>
> 9) Acked-for-MFD-by (count: 6) => Acked-by
>
> 10) Reviewed-off-by (count: 5) => Reviewed-by
>
> 11) Proposed-by (count: 5) => Suggested-by
> Rationale: On observing the mailing list, this tag is always used for a
> maintainer. It seems that the changes might have been suggested by them
> and the tag is used as acknowledgment for the same
>
> 12) Fixed-by (count: 3) => Co-developed-by
> Rationale: Fixing bug is a part of Software Development, so
> 'Co-developed-by' is perfectly fine, even if contributor did not create
> code
>
> 13) Pointed-out-by (count: 3) / Pointed-at-by (count: 2) => Suggested-by
> Rationale: The tags are used for maintainers. It seems that the changes
> might have been suggested by them and the tag is used as acknowledgment
> for the same
> E.g., Pointed-at-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>
>
> 14) Suggestions-by (count: 3) => Suggested-by
>
> 15) Generated-by (count: 17) => remove the tag
> On observing the mailing list, this tag is always used for quoting the
> tool or script, which might have been used to generate the patch.
> E.g. Generated-by: scripts/coccinelle/api/alloc/kzalloc-simple.cocci
>
> 16) Celebrated-by (count: 3) => remove the tag
> This tag was used for only one commit. On observing mailing list, it seem
> like the celebration for a particular patch and changes.
>
> Provide a fix by:
> 1) replacing the non-standard signature with its standard equivalent
> 2) removing the signature if it is not required
>
> Also, improve warning messages correspondingly, providing users
> suggestions to either replace or remove the signature. Also provide
> suitable rationale to the user for the suggestion made.
>
> Signed-off-by: Aditya Srivastava <[email protected]>
> ---
> changes in v2: replace commit specific example with brief evaluation
>
> changes in v3: provide rationale to users for every signature tag suggestion;
> modify commit message describing arrival to conclusion in a structured way
>
> scripts/checkpatch.pl | 101 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 99 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> index fdfd5ec09be6..f402c9c3958f 100755
> --- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> +++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
> @@ -506,6 +506,81 @@ our $signature_tags = qr{(?xi:
> Cc:
> )};
>
> +our %standard_signature_fix = (
> + "Requested-by:" => {
> + suggestion => "Suggested-by:",
> + rationale => "In an open-source project, there are no 'requests', just 'suggestions' to convince a maintainer to accept your patch",
> + },
> + "Co-authored-by:" => {
> + suggestion => "Co-developed-by:",
> + rationale => "Co-developed-by and Co-authored-by are synonyms",
> + },
Maybe this reads better:
Co-developed-by is the standard tag for patches developed by multiple authors.
> + "Analyzed-by:" => {
> + suggestion => "Co-developed-by:",
> + rationale => "Analyzing is a part of Software Development, so 'Co-developed-by' is perfectly fine, even if contributor did not create code",
> + },
> + "Analysed-by:" => {
> + suggestion => "Co-developed-by:",
> + rationale => "Analysing is a part of Software Development, so 'Co-developed-by' is perfectly fine, even if contributor did not create code",
> + },
> + "Improvements-by:" => {
> + suggestion => "Co-developed-by:",
> + rationale => "Performing improvements are a part of Software Development, so 'Co-developed-by' is perfectly fine, even if contributor did not create code",
> + },
> + "Noticed-by:" => {
> + suggestion => "Reported-by:",
> + rationale => "Reported-by and Noticed-by are synonyms",
> + },
Similarly:
Reported-by is the standard tag for denoting any notice or report.
> + "Inspired-by:" => {
> + suggestion => "Suggested-by:",
> + rationale => "Suggested-by is the standard signature tag for acknowledging user for their suggestions",
> + },
> + "Verified-by:" => {
> + suggestion => "Tested-by:",
> + rationale => "Tested-by and Verified-by are synonyms",
> + },
Similarly here.
> + "Okay-ished-by:" => {
> + suggestion => "Acked-by:",
> + rationale => "Acked-by is the standard signature tag for recording your approval",
> + },
I think "your" is wrong here; the person that runs checkpatch may not
be the person providing the approval.
So maybe:
- for recording one's approval.
or:
- for recording acknowledgement.
> + "Acked-for-MFD-by:" => {
> + suggestion => "Acked-by:",
> + rationale => "Acked-by is the standard signature tag for recording your approval",
> + },
> + "Reviewed-off-by:" => {
> + suggestion => "Reviewed-by:",
> + rationale => "Reviewed-by is the standard signature tag for recording your approval",
> + },
for recording the review.
> + "Proposed-by:" => {
> + suggestion => "Suggested-by:",
> + rationale => "Proposing changes is same as suggesting changes, so Suggested-by seems perfectly fine",
> + },
Similarly, the sentence as above could be used.
> + "Fixed-by:" => {
> + suggestion => "Co-developed-by:",
> + rationale => "Fixing bug is a part of Software Development, so 'Co-developed-by' is perfectly fine, even if contributor did not create code",
> + },
> + "Pointed-out-by:" => {
> + suggestion => "Suggested-by:",
> + rationale => "Pointing out certain changes is synonymous to suggesting changes, so Suggested-by seems perfectly fine",
> + },
> + "Pointed-at-by:" => {
> + suggestion => "Suggested-by:",
> + rationale => "Pointing at certain changes is synonymous to suggesting changes, so Suggested-by seems perfectly fine",
> + },
> + "Suggestions-by:" => {
> + suggestion => "Suggested-by:",
> + rationale => "Suggested-by is the standard signature tag for acknowledging user for their suggestions",
> + },
> + "Generated-by:" => {
> + suggestion => "remove",
> + rationale => "Signature tags are used to acknowledge users for their contributions. It is advised to describe about tools in commit description instead",
> + },
> + "Celebrated-by:" => {
> + suggestion => "remove",
> + rationale => "Signature tags are used to acknowledge users for their contributions. This tag may not be required at all",
> + },
> +);
> +
> our @typeListMisordered = (
> qr{char\s+(?:un)?signed},
> qr{int\s+(?:(?:un)?signed\s+)?short\s},
> @@ -2773,8 +2848,30 @@ sub process {
> my $ucfirst_sign_off = ucfirst(lc($sign_off));
>
> if ($sign_off !~ /$signature_tags/) {
> - WARN("BAD_SIGN_OFF",
> - "Non-standard signature: $sign_off\n" . $herecurr);
> + my $suggested_signature = "";
> + my $rationale = "";
> + if (exists($standard_signature_fix{$sign_off})) {
> + $suggested_signature = $standard_signature_fix{$sign_off}{'suggestion'};
> + $rationale = $standard_signature_fix{$sign_off}{'rationale'};
> + }
> + if ($suggested_signature eq "") {
> + WARN("BAD_SIGN_OFF",
> + "Non-standard signature: $sign_off\n" . $herecurr);
> + }
> + elsif ($suggested_signature eq "remove") {
> + if (WARN("BAD_SIGN_OFF",
> + "Non-standard signature: $sign_off. Please consider removing this signature tag. $rationale\n" . $herecurr) &&
> + $fix) {
> + fix_delete_line($fixlinenr, $rawline);
> + }
> + }
> + else {
> + if (WARN("BAD_SIGN_OFF",
> + "Non-standard signature: $sign_off. Please use '$suggested_signature' instead. $rationale\n" . $herecurr) &&
> + $fix) {
> + $fixed[$fixlinenr] =~ s/$sign_off/$suggested_signature/;
> + }
> + }
> }
> if (defined $space_before && $space_before ne "") {
> if (WARN("BAD_SIGN_OFF",
> --
> 2.17.1
>
Currently, checkpatch.pl warns for BAD_SIGN_OFF on non-standard signature
styles.
This warning occurs because of incorrect use of signature tags,
e.g. an evaluation on v4.13..v5.8 showed the use of following incorrect
signature tags, which may seem correct, but are not standard:
1) Requested-by (count: 48) => Suggested-by
Rationale: In an open-source project, there are no 'requests', just
'suggestions' to convince a maintainer to accept your patch
2) Co-authored-by (count: 43) => Co-developed-by
Rationale: Co-developed-by and Co-authored-by are synonyms
3) Analyzed-by (count: 22) / Analysed-by (count: 5) => Co-developed-by
Rationale: Analyzing is a part of Software Development, so
'Co-developed-by' is perfectly fine, even if contributor did not create
code
4) Improvements-by (count: 19) => Co-developed-by
5) Noticed-by (count: 11) => Reported-by
6) Inspired-by (count: 11) => Suggested-by
7) Verified-by (count: 8) => Tested-by
Rationale: Used by a single user. On reading mailing list, it seems
Tested-by might be a suitable alternative
8) Okay-ished-by (count: 8) => Acked-by
Rationale: Used by a single user. On reading mailing list, it seems
Acked-by must be suitable alternative
9) Acked-for-MFD-by (count: 6) => Acked-by
10) Reviewed-off-by (count: 5) => Reviewed-by
11) Proposed-by (count: 5) => Suggested-by
Rationale: On observing the mailing list, this tag is always used for a
maintainer. It seems that the changes might have been suggested by them
and the tag is used as acknowledgment for the same
12) Fixed-by (count: 3) => Co-developed-by
Rationale: Fixing bug is a part of Software Development, so
'Co-developed-by' is perfectly fine, even if contributor did not create
code
13) Pointed-out-by (count: 3) / Pointed-at-by (count: 2) => Suggested-by
Rationale: The tags are used for maintainers. It seems that the changes
might have been suggested by them and the tag is used as acknowledgment
for the same
E.g., Pointed-at-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>
14) Suggestions-by (count: 3) => Suggested-by
15) Generated-by (count: 17) => remove the tag
On observing the mailing list, this tag is always used for quoting the
tool or script, which might have been used to generate the patch.
E.g. Generated-by: scripts/coccinelle/api/alloc/kzalloc-simple.cocci
16) Celebrated-by (count: 3) => remove the tag
This tag was used for only one commit. On observing mailing list, it seem
like the celebration for a particular patch and changes.
Provide a fix by:
1) replacing the non-standard signature with its standard equivalent
2) removing the signature if it is not required
Also, improve warning messages correspondingly, providing users
suggestions to either replace or remove the signature. Also provide
suitable rationale to the user for the suggestion made.
Signed-off-by: Aditya Srivastava <[email protected]>
---
changes in v2: replace commit specific example with brief evaluation
changes in v3: provide rationale to users for every signature tag suggestion;
modify commit message describing arrival to conclusion in a structured way
changes in v4: modify rationale for certain suggestions
scripts/checkpatch.pl | 101 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 99 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
index fdfd5ec09be6..b018deecec1a 100755
--- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
+++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
@@ -506,6 +506,81 @@ our $signature_tags = qr{(?xi:
Cc:
)};
+our %standard_signature_fix = (
+ "Requested-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Suggested-by:",
+ rationale => "In an open-source project, there are no 'requests', just 'suggestions' to convince a maintainer to accept your patch",
+ },
+ "Co-authored-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Co-developed-by:",
+ rationale => "Co-developed-by is the standard signature tag to attribute multiple authors for a patch",
+ },
+ "Analyzed-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Co-developed-by:",
+ rationale => "Analyzing is a part of Software Development, so 'Co-developed-by' is perfectly fine, even if contributor did not create code",
+ },
+ "Analysed-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Co-developed-by:",
+ rationale => "Analysing is a part of Software Development, so 'Co-developed-by' is perfectly fine, even if contributor did not create code",
+ },
+ "Improvements-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Co-developed-by:",
+ rationale => "Performing improvements are a part of Software Development, so 'Co-developed-by' is perfectly fine, even if contributor did not create code",
+ },
+ "Noticed-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Reported-by:",
+ rationale => "Reported-by is the standard signature tag for acknowledging user who noticed or reported any bug(s)",
+ },
+ "Inspired-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Suggested-by:",
+ rationale => "Suggested-by is the standard signature tag for acknowledging user for their suggestions",
+ },
+ "Verified-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Tested-by:",
+ rationale => "Tested-by is the standard signature tag to attribute user for verifying/testing the patch",
+ },
+ "Okay-ished-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Acked-by:",
+ rationale => "Acked-by is the standard signature tag for recording one's approval",
+ },
+ "Acked-for-MFD-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Acked-by:",
+ rationale => "Acked-by is the standard signature tag for recording one's approval",
+ },
+ "Reviewed-off-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Reviewed-by:",
+ rationale => "Reviewed-by is the standard signature tag to indicate that the patch has been reviewed",
+ },
+ "Proposed-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Suggested-by:",
+ rationale => "Suggested-by is the standard signature tag for acknowledging user for their suggestions",
+ },
+ "Fixed-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Co-developed-by:",
+ rationale => "Fixing bug is a part of Software Development, so 'Co-developed-by' is perfectly fine, even if contributor did not create code",
+ },
+ "Pointed-out-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Suggested-by:",
+ rationale => "Pointing out certain changes is synonymous to suggesting changes, so Suggested-by seems perfectly fine",
+ },
+ "Pointed-at-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Suggested-by:",
+ rationale => "Pointing at certain changes is synonymous to suggesting changes, so Suggested-by seems perfectly fine",
+ },
+ "Suggestions-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "Suggested-by:",
+ rationale => "Suggested-by is the standard signature tag for acknowledging user for their suggestions",
+ },
+ "Generated-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "remove",
+ rationale => "Signature tags are used to acknowledge users for their contributions. It is advised to describe about tools in commit description instead",
+ },
+ "Celebrated-by:" => {
+ suggestion => "remove",
+ rationale => "Signature tags are used to acknowledge users for their contributions. This tag may not be required at all",
+ },
+);
+
our @typeListMisordered = (
qr{char\s+(?:un)?signed},
qr{int\s+(?:(?:un)?signed\s+)?short\s},
@@ -2773,8 +2848,30 @@ sub process {
my $ucfirst_sign_off = ucfirst(lc($sign_off));
if ($sign_off !~ /$signature_tags/) {
- WARN("BAD_SIGN_OFF",
- "Non-standard signature: $sign_off\n" . $herecurr);
+ my $suggested_signature = "";
+ my $rationale = "";
+ if (exists($standard_signature_fix{$sign_off})) {
+ $suggested_signature = $standard_signature_fix{$sign_off}{'suggestion'};
+ $rationale = $standard_signature_fix{$sign_off}{'rationale'};
+ }
+ if ($suggested_signature eq "") {
+ WARN("BAD_SIGN_OFF",
+ "Non-standard signature: $sign_off\n" . $herecurr);
+ }
+ elsif ($suggested_signature eq "remove") {
+ if (WARN("BAD_SIGN_OFF",
+ "Non-standard signature: $sign_off. Please consider removing this signature tag. $rationale\n" . $herecurr) &&
+ $fix) {
+ fix_delete_line($fixlinenr, $rawline);
+ }
+ }
+ else {
+ if (WARN("BAD_SIGN_OFF",
+ "Non-standard signature: $sign_off. Please use '$suggested_signature' instead. $rationale\n" . $herecurr) &&
+ $fix) {
+ $fixed[$fixlinenr] =~ s/$sign_off/$suggested_signature/;
+ }
+ }
}
if (defined $space_before && $space_before ne "") {
if (WARN("BAD_SIGN_OFF",
--
2.17.1
On Tue, 2020-11-24 at 07:54 +0100, Lukas Bulwahn wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 6:33 PM Joe Perches <[email protected]> wrote:
[]
> Maybe a patch reduced to the very obvious synonyms helps newcomers or
> people with lousy memory to be reminded that it is called
> "Co-developed-by:" not "Co-authored-by".
I have no issue with proximity matching for nominally invalid uses.
I think the method used wasn't great though.
For trivial spelling defects, levenshtein might work well enough.
On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 8:26 AM Joe Perches <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2020-11-24 at 07:54 +0100, Lukas Bulwahn wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 6:33 PM Joe Perches <[email protected]> wrote:
> []
> > Maybe a patch reduced to the very obvious synonyms helps newcomers or
> > people with lousy memory to be reminded that it is called
> > "Co-developed-by:" not "Co-authored-by".
>
> I have no issue with proximity matching for nominally invalid uses.
> I think the method used wasn't great though.
> For trivial spelling defects, levenshtein might work well enough.
>
Yes, that is true. Aditya has actually created two patches, one using
some edit distance to find matches and one using a fixed match for
those cases (the one you see here). Both patches complement each
other. But he has only sent the second patch to you yet.
I guess when the other patch is sent out, it is a much clearer full
picture how this fix option will work.
Lukas