From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752379AbcBORne (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Feb 2016 12:43:34 -0500 Received: from tex.lwn.net ([70.33.254.29]:37729 "EHLO vena.lwn.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750918AbcBORnd (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Feb 2016 12:43:33 -0500 Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2016 10:43:30 -0700 From: Jonathan Corbet To: Florian Fainelli Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] Documentation: SubmittingPatches: Add note about Reviewed-by tags Message-ID: <20160215104330.22cbd8c9@lwn.net> In-Reply-To: <1455243178-10249-1-git-send-email-f.fainelli@gmail.com> References: <1455243178-10249-1-git-send-email-f.fainelli@gmail.com> Organization: LWN.net X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.12.0 (GTK+ 2.24.28; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 11 Feb 2016 18:12:58 -0800 Florian Fainelli wrote: > As is now common in a lot of organization having an internal code review > process (be it through Gerritt or other tools), patches extracted from > this review process and submitted to public mailing-lists will have > pre-existing Reviewed-by tags. Add a note about why these tags exists, > and what a maintainer could be doing with those. Some maintainers did > complain before that these tags had to be added when the patches get > submitted to the public, while some just ignored and took the patches > as-is. So I'll confess, I'm not quite sold on this one. This is a document for people looking to learn about how to submit patches; it is already far too long, complex, and bureaucratic. I'm not at all convinced that adding suggestions for maintainers is appropriate here. Is there a real problem that this patch is trying to solve? Thanks, jon