Re: [PATCH] ARM: dts: sun8i: h3: orangepi-plus: Fix Ethernet PHY mode

[Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org>]

Hi Maxime,

On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 05:06:52PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> On Sun, May 16, 2021 at 01:18:44PM -0700, Vagrant Cascadian wrote:
> > On 2021-05-16, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
> > > On Sat, Feb 13, 2021 at 09:51:17AM +0100, Jernej Škrabec wrote:
> > >> Let me first explain that it was oversight on my side not noticing initials in 
> > >> your SoB tag. But since the issue was raised by Maxime, I didn't follow up.
> > >> 
> > >> Dne sobota, 13. februar 2021 ob 07:51:32 CET je B.R. Oake napisal(a):
> > >> > On Wed Feb 10 at 16:01:18 CET 2021, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> > >> > > Unfortunately we can't take this patch as is, this needs to be your real
> > >> > > name, see:
> > >> > > https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html#de
> > >> > > veloper-s-certificate-of-origin-1-1
> > >> > Dear Maxime,
> > >> > 
> > >> > Thank you very much for considering my contribution and for all your
> > >> > work on supporting sunxi-based hardware; I appreciate it.
> > >> > 
> > >> > Thank you for referring me to the Developer's Certificate of Origin, but
> > >> > I had already read it before submitting (I had to do so in order to know
> > >> > what I was saying by "Signed-off-by:") and I do certify what it says.
> > >> > 
> > >> > Looking through recent entries in the commit log of the mainline kernel,
> > >> > I see several patches from authors such as:
> > >> > 
> > >> >   H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
> > >> >   B K Karthik <karthik.bk2000@live.com>
> > >> >   JC Kuo <jckuo@nvidia.com>
> > >> >   EJ Hsu <ejh@nvidia.com>
> > >> >   LH Lin <lh.lin@mediatek.com>
> > >> >   KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org>
> > >> >   Karthik B S <karthik.b.s@intel.com>
> > >> >   Shreyas NC <shreyas.nc@intel.com>
> > >> >   Vandana BN <bnvandana@gmail.com>
> > >> > 
> > >> > so I believe names of this form are in fact acceptable, even if the
> > >> > style might seem a little old-fashioned to some.
> > >> 
> > >> Speaking generally, not only for this case, prior art arguments rarely hold, 
> > >> because:
> > >> - it might be oversight,
> > >> - it might be a bad practice, which should not be followed in new 
> > >> contributions,
> > >> - different maintainers have different point of view on same thing,
> > >> - maintainer wants to adapt new practice or steer subsystem in new direction
> > >> 
> > >> > 
> > >> > I would like to add that I have met many people with names such as C.J.,
> > >> > A A, TC, MG, etc. That is what everybody calls them and it would be
> > >> > natural for them to sign themselves that way. Some of them might want to
> > >> > contribute to Linux some day, and I think it would be a great shame and
> > >> > a loss to all of us if they were discouraged from doing so by reading
> > >> > our conversation in the archives and concluding that any contribution
> > >> > from them, however small, would be summarily refused simply because of
> > >> > their name. Please could you ensure that does not happen?
> > >> 
> > >> The link you posted says following:
> > >> "using your real name (sorry, no pseudonyms or anonymous contributions.)"
> > >> 
> > >> I believe that real name means no initials, no matter what people are 
> > >> accustomed to. From my point of view, CJ is pseudonym derived from real name.
> > >> 
> > >> This is not the first time that fix of SoB tag was requested, you can find such 
> > >> requests in ML archives.
> > 
> > I'm sure this isn't the first time this sort of thing has been brought
> > up on this subject, but I feel obliged to mention:
> > 
> >   https://www.kalzumeus.com/2010/06/17/falsehoods-programmers-believe-about-names/
> > 
> > This seems to be blocked on culturally dependent perception of what
> > looks like a "real name" as opposed to any technical grounds.
> > 
> > What is the goal of the "real name" in Signed-off-by actually trying to
> > achieve?
> 
> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html#developer-s-certificate-of-origin-1-1
> 
> I'm not the one making the rules, sorry

Would it be technically possible to do the following: Based on the
downstream report we receved in Debian in
https://bugs.debian.org/988574 wrap up the same patch (I guess I will
need to use another commit message wording) and resubmit with my own
SoB with my downstream hat on and say a Tested-by from Vagrant? So we
are not blocked on the SoB issue from this original post of the change
to apply to arch/arm/boot/dts/sun8i-h3-orangepi-plus.dts ?

Regards,
Salvatore