Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 9 Jan 2021 10:54:29 -0700
From:      Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>
To:        Kyle Evans <kevans@freebsd.org>
Cc:        freebsd-git <freebsd-git@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Patch Attribution
Message-ID:  <CANCZdfoxbuOCuaC7jZ7j=mgMiF8nE8MwhJU-W2AGfLKAXRGYQw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CACNAnaEA59wn04_GH0JU=94dH0NtJATHyo8aZTGs=sn7Bo9qcA@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <CACNAnaEA59wn04_GH0JU=94dH0NtJATHyo8aZTGs=sn7Bo9qcA@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Jan 9, 2021 at 10:52 AM Kyle Evans <kevans@freebsd.org> wrote:

> Hello!
>
> I haven't (that I recall) seen any particular guidance one way or the
> other, but what's the general feeling on "Submitted by" for patches
> that come in via Bugzilla without commit metadata vs. committing
> locally with --author="Name <email>"?
>
> I did this with d36b5db and didn't receive any complaints, but I'm
> curious if we should be more actively promoting setting the author
> correctly whether the patch came in with it or not. I noted that
> Warner's meta doc[0] lists "Submitted-by" which is where my
> uncertainty comes from.
>

My document should be updated. I think what you did is fine, and we should
document it as best practice.

Warner



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CANCZdfoxbuOCuaC7jZ7j=mgMiF8nE8MwhJU-W2AGfLKAXRGYQw>