From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz <jorge.ramirez-ortiz@linaro.org>,
Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>,
Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] docs: Explicitly state ordering requirements for Co-developed-by
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2019 15:37:57 +0100 (CET) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1903211537340.1784@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190321142622.GA6519@linux.intel.com>
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 03:30:10PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> Hmm, and my experience is exclusively limited to contributing code to
> someone else's patches. Rather than dictate exact ordering, what about
> deferring to standard sign-off procedure?
>
> E.g.:
>
> A Co-developed-by: states that the patch was also created by another developer
> along with the original author. This is useful at times when multiple people
> work on a single patch. Co-developed-by: must be immediately followed by a
> Signed-off-by: of the co-author(s). As per standard sign-off procedure, the
> ordering of Co-developed-by:/Signed-off-by: pairs should reflect the patch's
> handling 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.
Yes, that makes sense.
Thanks,
tglx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-03-21 14:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-03-20 15:11 [PATCH] docs: Explicitly state ordering requirements for Co-developed-by Sean Christopherson
2019-03-21 13:30 ` Jani Nikula
2019-03-21 14:26 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-03-21 14:37 ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
2019-03-21 15:00 ` Jani Nikula
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=alpine.DEB.2.21.1903211537340.1784@nanos.tec.linutronix.de \
--to=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jani.nikula@linux.intel.com \
--cc=jic23@kernel.org \
--cc=joe@perches.com \
--cc=jorge.ramirez-ortiz@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=niklas.cassel@linaro.org \
--cc=sean.j.christopherson@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).