Date: Sat, 9 Jan 2021 10:56:28 -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: <CANCZdfpammNQoCc0antYq==h=c2ZwviBHgrOjhn66fY0qtd1CA@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CANCZdfoxbuOCuaC7jZ7j=mgMiF8nE8MwhJU-W2AGfLKAXRGYQw@mail.gmail.com> References: <CACNAnaEA59wn04_GH0JU=94dH0NtJATHyo8aZTGs=sn7Bo9qcA@mail.gmail.com> <CANCZdfoxbuOCuaC7jZ7j=mgMiF8nE8MwhJU-W2AGfLKAXRGYQw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Jan 9, 2021 at 10:54 AM Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote: > > > 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. > If you write something, I'll land it :). We should also consider what to do for code we pull in from NetBSD, etc.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CANCZdfpammNQoCc0antYq==h=c2ZwviBHgrOjhn66fY0qtd1CA>