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;
Message-ID: <cddb7f4f3e247aacd54132d418009bba03308ed0.camel@perches.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: whitelist Originally-by: signature
From:   Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
To:     Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        Eugeniu Rosca <erosca@de.adit-jv.com>
Cc:     Andy Whitcroft <apw@canonical.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Eugeniu Rosca <roscaeugeniu@gmail.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Date:   Fri, 15 Nov 2019 13:32:54 -0800
In-Reply-To: <20191115092943.7c79f81e@lwn.net>
References: <20191115150202.15208-1-erosca@de.adit-jv.com>
         <05ba4e29fb78885cf9abf7bfc87e0a7bcda099fe.camel@perches.com>
         <20191115154627.GA2187@lxhi-065.adit-jv.com>
         <20191115092943.7c79f81e@lwn.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
User-Agent: Evolution 3.34.1-2 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, 2019-11-15 at 09:29 -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Nov 2019 16:46:27 +0100
> Eugeniu Rosca <erosca@de.adit-jv.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 07:09:17AM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2019-11-15 at 16:02 +0100, Eugeniu Rosca wrote:  
> > > > Oftentimes [1], the contributor would like to honor or give credits [2]
> > > > to somebody's original ideas in the submission/reviewing process. While
> > > > "Co-developed-by:" and "Suggested-by:" (currently whitelisted) could be
> > > > employed for this purpose, they are not ideal.  
> > > 
> > > You need to get the use of this accepted into Documentation/process
> > > before adding it to checkpatch  
> > 
> > If the change [*] makes sense to you, I can submit an update to
> > Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
> 
> So there appear to be 89 patches with Originally-by in the entire Git
> history, which isn't a a lot; there are 3x as many Co-developed-by tags,
> which still isn't a huge number.  I do wonder if it's worth recognizing
> yet another tag with a subtly different shade of meaning here?  My own
> opinion doesn't matter a lot, but I'd like to have a sense that there is
> wider acceptance of this tag before adding it to the docs.

I am also not a proponent of adding this as a new tag/signature.