Received: by 2002:ac0:bc90:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id a16csp920367img; Thu, 21 Mar 2019 11:44:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyDogFVAb6rWNyi0Y55PUcaCf0V8ZtxdQZhFST4lzA22VCQDK0CcIBUdXFxnmDktMlgjfYw X-Received: by 2002:a63:2c4c:: with SMTP id s73mr4784433pgs.113.1553193878066; Thu, 21 Mar 2019 11:44:38 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1553193878; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=xPcNPgTU6f124jnhDfXNV86HO2/P9Ce3mm/LEwRB5kcY8p5J/5ZnhNAP7l67UNntOC wb1r2+mwo4hrYja+Rgp1KMV56LbLAjlRq1Hz0/EfMp8knKHYlDcOM2X7XlKmFjFtiVv2 RuVduTYgq6bc72jzPj5YokWXrrRH4NNU+HTss5ISx39X6W/0rSoKtUjtdWRzsTd1hbtg pP8/OmamDEfTtoUIPoBFG3MjVhQGkO6TsVhGP3zL4JK46J6wSpaaT/MoKS65M/Q73Z6Z gsq/KmWd0DTWiKF+SzUqUuA0czwH80MXoj5mt9WCPusKWe31Km0oPMgOkrfr6H5j6hC6 NHjQ== 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 :message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from; bh=f25Dc/HoLKmvkf6OtIQ0mAsOFA4uFtV1ymRQbeD6CHY=; b=ciNYKdOgBdTXNou6oAQllQfZCAlmZelLGdHVGObaJlKPO+ZRKTnrIJ2krcRQeOg3yo 6srYlQyKfU1fFi80qkAl5ZY2IcRC+3ZqOsnX0WsUHXidad9Q8QghNweZ1rUR+vaNfCi9 T1+eBTNWdFZfuheejSBk9NGLUzHxWLAAcEVxx6/aMQtJ3/AipO6ULx+jWwt+YpdaUwwz qu89jJb02SRS1NWZ4Wusid443Hn/AMmVCw0CJyECP5Hs6ip2o2kbt+kuT2d9eYsJh+V4 7vV731/QDOtnBrGhhSBn2BzCHhbkblXe/qljAvy6G4Ri5UHh+it06JjtwoTn5y9Hp/dD PvSA== 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; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=intel.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id a10si4503064pgt.357.2019.03.21.11.44.23; Thu, 21 Mar 2019 11:44:38 -0700 (PDT) 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; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=intel.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728797AbfCUSnW (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:43:22 -0400 Received: from mga17.intel.com ([192.55.52.151]:6550 "EHLO mga17.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728649AbfCUSnW (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Mar 2019 14:43:22 -0400 X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga007.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.58]) by fmsmga107.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 21 Mar 2019 11:43:21 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.60,253,1549958400"; d="scan'208";a="124718149" Received: from sjchrist-coffee.jf.intel.com ([10.54.74.181]) by orsmga007.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 21 Mar 2019 11:43:20 -0700 From: Sean Christopherson To: Jonathan Corbet Cc: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner , Jani Nikula , Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz , Jonathan Cameron , Joe Perches , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Niklas Cassel Subject: [PATCH v2] docs: Clarify the usage and sign-off requirements for Co-developed-by Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2019 11:43:16 -0700 Message-Id: <20190321184316.8525-1-sean.j.christopherson@intel.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.21.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org The documentation for Co-developed-by is a bit light on details, e.g. it doesn't explicitly state that: - Multiple Co-developed-by tags are perfectly acceptable - Co-developed-by and Signed-off-by must be paired together - SOB ordering should still follow standard sign-off procedure Lack of explicit direciton has resulted in developers taking a variety of approaches, often lacking any intent whatsoever, e.g. scattering SOBs willy-nilly, collecting them all at the end or the beginning, etc... Tweak the wording to make it clear that multiple co-authors are allowed, and document the expectation that standard sign-off procedures are to be followed. Provide examples to (hopefully) eliminate any ambiguity. Cc: Thomas Gleixner Cc: Jani Nikula Cc: Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz Cc: Jonathan Cameron Cc: Joe Perches Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman Cc: Niklas Cassel Cc: Jonathan Corbet Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson --- v1: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190320151140.32432-1-sean.j.christopherson@intel.com v2: Rewrite the blurb to state standard sign-off procedure should be followed as opposed to dictating the original author's SOB be last. Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst | 24 +++++++++++++++++--- 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst b/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst index be7d1829c3af..a7a9da68a384 100644 --- a/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst +++ b/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst @@ -545,10 +545,28 @@ 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. -A Co-developed-by: states that the patch was also created by another developer +A Co-developed-by: states that the patch was co-created by other developer(s) along with the original author. This is useful at times when multiple people -work on a single patch. Note, this person also needs to have a Signed-off-by: -line in the patch as well. +work on a single patch. Every Co-developed-by: must be immediately followed by +a Signed-off-by: of the co-author. Standard sign-off procedure applies, i.e. +the ordering of Co-developed-by:/Signed-off-by: pairs should reflect the +chronological history of the patch insofar as possible. Notably, the last +Signed-off-by: must always be that of the developer submitting the patch, +regardless of whether they are the original author or a co-author. + +Example of a patch with multiple co-authors, submitted by the original author:: + + Co-developed-by: First Co-Author + Signed-off-by: First Co-Author + Co-developed-by: Second Co-Author + Signed-off-by: Second Co-Author + Signed-off-by: Original Author + +Example of a patch submitted by a co-author:: + + Signed-off-by: Original Author + Co-developed-by: Submitting Co-Author + Signed-off-by: Submitting Co-Author 13) Using Reported-by:, Tested-by:, Reviewed-by:, Suggested-by: and Fixes: -- 2.21.0