Received: by 2002:ad5:474a:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id i10csp2277743imu; Fri, 14 Dec 2018 08:29:09 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AFSGD/XUjr36SF2VL3l52eqMXpm+ll+qTqB87DsNKhLlukeG9GKI27c+viAbKhkFHjwySl8njAI5 X-Received: by 2002:a63:ab08:: with SMTP id p8mr3211354pgf.87.1544804949523; Fri, 14 Dec 2018 08:29:09 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1544804949; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=mRy3Aj3eKn+1U7lsvaoR+GzmxNeq3n878vwMnTN1RzUE2mDa7yKHbH2FYY992jjigZ qwQv9TDostUXq1k5AgssrfJaXFccQ1jIaZ+jB1I4CEUo3S7r6+mDrzYNKAjZYLjcaNdd NSG3bEJIED68rTP014p8gb0YD9rqEsxxnz1GHFuLKDe73o50ay4hGdBCMcgb2m1Gv/DJ qTknNBala4h6VsVFxw8VoGK+w0CjsDCNtTzXNiJS0Ng47PRFSGEg/HlxAVR2Zz2ss9NR HTjWOpfyE5Qp1aTmGsgXCE1AoLR4jrLq84NeWYN3Yi00KcaCBu+jBSeOBh3A3ywlsBBY hu7Q== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :user-agent:references:in-reply-to:date:cc:to:from:subject :message-id; bh=/9WPc+U9KsrL8GHFwvWCblCZCOGspD6heoXvK6HuUcw=; b=MFwcfYJoHKeaWG5RaxkAiTq5O5d4F7Oux36RriEc5tcHzfGk15gWtl0sqvN/00grWi rXrgWTsNUUBn4pBilefLqSV/F8T6ntEBJnndyNANIsHMyAvhfKWNUn8udTklDfcvAyce ss3WqQBrkf7fPx6mg3t1tZcCU7iOI36ieyeGkeCpG46v+u6bN7b4yWwbZ5Tw/oj5Hc0+ riEUXOT+GmhCluVTFiINesbbRyNM0OlB0C8uDp1IaFoYWsz8d/Z7RvHrnA/+q2lD84XZ 0v8oOvCfUpU/JwSalRB71Bbo8rY4OpxwOkS+bLA/Gv8pFYH8JcQTq6u/C22IRIUVpgS1 d9xA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id a3si1044805pga.297.2018.12.14.08.28.54; Fri, 14 Dec 2018 08:29:09 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729750AbeLNQ1i (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 14 Dec 2018 11:27:38 -0500 Received: from smtprelay0039.hostedemail.com ([216.40.44.39]:39646 "EHLO smtprelay.hostedemail.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728731AbeLNQ1i (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Dec 2018 11:27:38 -0500 Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (clb03-v110.bra.tucows.net [216.40.38.60]) by smtprelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44C51837F27F; Fri, 14 Dec 2018 16:27:36 +0000 (UTC) X-Session-Marker: 6A6F6540706572636865732E636F6D X-Spam-Summary: 2,0,0,,d41d8cd98f00b204,joe@perches.com,:::::::::::::,RULES_HIT:41:355:379:599:968:973:979:988:989:1260:1277:1311:1313:1314:1345:1359:1437:1515:1516:1518:1534:1541:1593:1594:1711:1730:1747:1777:1792:2198:2199:2393:2553:2559:2562:2828:3138:3139:3140:3141:3142:3353:3622:3865:3867:3868:3870:3871:3872:3874:4321:4383:4605:5007:7903:10004:10400:10848:11232:11658:11914:12043:12740:12760:12895:13069:13095:13311:13357:13439:14096:14097:14181:14659:14721:21080:21433:21450:21451:21627:30045:30054:30090:30091,0,RBL:47.151.153.53:@perches.com:.lbl8.mailshell.net-62.8.0.100 64.201.201.201,CacheIP:none,Bayesian:0.5,0.5,0.5,Netcheck:none,DomainCache:0,MSF:not bulk,SPF:fn,MSBL:0,DNSBL:neutral,Custom_rules:0:0:0,LFtime:27,LUA_SUMMARY:none X-HE-Tag: week04_7c675ea555646 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 2922 Received: from XPS-9350.home (unknown [47.151.153.53]) (Authenticated sender: joe@perches.com) by omf03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Fri, 14 Dec 2018 16:27:34 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <8ae5c67a5c4516a783579e449313d1d59fe3a47d.camel@perches.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: add Co-Developed-by to signature tags From: Joe Perches To: Himanshu Jha Cc: Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz , apw@canonical.com, Andrew Morton , Greg KH , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, niklas.cassel@linaro.org Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2018 08:27:33 -0800 In-Reply-To: <20181214161604.GA17456@himanshu-Vostro-3559> References: <1544792494-15485-1-git-send-email-jorge.ramirez-ortiz@linaro.org> <839c1d04000164e27dff9742e3efc3bcff3025b6.camel@perches.com> <20181214161604.GA17456@himanshu-Vostro-3559> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" User-Agent: Evolution 3.30.1-1build1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 2018-12-14 at 21:46 +0530, Himanshu Jha wrote: > On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 07:52:15AM -0800, Joe Perches wrote: > > On Fri, 2018-12-14 at 14:01 +0100, Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz wrote: > > > As per Documentation/process/submitting-patches, Co-developed-by is a > > > valid signature. > > > > > > This commit removes the warning. > > > > Your commit message doesn't match your subject. > > > > A couple variants have been documented and only > > one should actually be used. > > > > $ git grep -i co-developed-by Documentation/process/ > > Documentation/process/5.Posting.rst: - Co-developed-by: states that the patch was also created by another developer > > Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst:12) When to use Acked-by:, Cc:, and Co-Developed-by: > > Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst:A Co-Developed-by: states that the patch was also created by another developer > > > > $ git log --grep="co-developed-by:" -i | \ > > grep -ohiP "co-developed-by:" | sort | uniq -c | sort -rn > > 80 Co-developed-by: > > 40 Co-Developed-by: > > > > So which should it be? > > > > btw: I prefer neither as I think Signed-off-by: is sufficient. > > OK, but does multiple Signed-off-by: in the commits imply that > the patch was created by all those developers ? > > I don't think so, perhaps this was the reason to introduce > Co-developed-by: tag. Perhaps, but a sign-off is also a recognition that the patch was passed-through by individuals Effectively, there's no real difference. "Co-developed-by:" is just another word for "Authored-by:" where multiple "Authorship" is the thing being notated. Is it really important to specify things like 75% / 25% authorship crediting? I don't really care about attribution so the concept is not particularly valuable to me.