Re: [Ksummit-discuss] crediting bug reports and fixes folded into original patch

[Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>]

On 12/9/20 8:58 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 09:01:49PM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
>> On Tue, 2020-12-08 at 16:34 -0800, Kees Cook wrote:
>> 
>> > If not "Adjusted-by", what about "Tweaked-by", "Helped-by",
>> > "Corrected-by"?
>> 
>> Improved-by: / Enhanced-by: / Revisions-by: 
>> 
> 
> I don't think we should give any credit for improvements or enhancements,

Well, some are actually useful and not about reviewer's preferred style :) But
if an author redoes the patch as a result, it's their choice to mention useful
improvements in the next version's change log.

> only for fixes.  Complaining about style is its own reward.

Right, let's focus on fixes and reports of bugs, that would have resulted in a
standalone commit, but don't.

> Having to redo a patch is already a huge headache.  Normally, I already
> considered the reviewer's prefered style and decided I didn't like it.
> Then to make me redo the patch in an ugly style and say thankyou on
> top of that???  Forget about it.  Plus, as a reviewer I hate reviewing
> patches over and over.
> 
> I've argued for years that we should have a Fixes-from: tag.  The zero

Standardizing the Fixes-from: tag (or any better name) would be a forward
progress, yes.

> day bot is already encouraging people to add Reported-by tags for this
> and a lot of people do.

"Reported-by:" becomes ambiguous once the bugfix for the reported issue in the
patch is folded, as it's no longer clear whether the bot reported the original
issue the patch is fixing, or a bug in the fix. So we should have a different
variant. "Fixes-reported-by:" so it has the same prefix?

> regards,
> dan carpenter
> 

_______________________________________________
Ksummit-discuss mailing list
Ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ksummit-discuss