On 10.02.25 17:16, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > Em Fri, 7 Feb 2025 09:24:56 +0100 > Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> escreveu: > >> On 07.02.25 02:42, Bagas Sanjaya wrote: >>> On Thu, Feb 06, 2025 at 03:30:10PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >>>> diff --git a/Documentation/process/5.Posting.rst b/Documentation/process/5.Posting.rst >>>> index dbb763a8de901d..22fa925353cf54 100644 >>>> --- a/Documentation/process/5.Posting.rst >>>> +++ b/Documentation/process/5.Posting.rst >>>> @@ -268,10 +268,15 @@ The tags in common use are: >>>> - Cc: the named person received a copy of the patch and had the >>>> opportunity to comment on it. >>>> >>>> -Be careful in the addition of tags to your patches, as only Cc: is appropriate >>>> -for addition without the explicit permission of the person named; using >>>> -Reported-by: is fine most of the time as well, but ask for permission if >>>> -the bug was reported in private. >>>> +Be careful in the addition of the aforementioned tags to your patches, as all >>>> +except for Cc:, Reported-by:, and Suggested-by: need explicit permission of the >>>> +person named. For those three implicit permission is sufficient if the person >>>> +contributed to the Linux kernel using that name and email address according >>>> +to the lore archives or the commit history -- and in case of Reported-by: >>>> +and Suggested-by: did the reporting or suggestion in public. Note, >>>> +bugzilla.kernel.org is a public place in this sense, but email addresses >>>> +used there are private; so do not expose them in tags, unless the person >>>> +used them in earlier contributions. >>> >>> So for example I can only include Tested-by: when a contributor who tested >>> my patch explicitly offer the tag by replying to it i.e. with the tag, right? >> At some point a text must leave the interpretation up to the reader. I >> would say a "yes, that's okay" to the question "is it okay to add a >> 'tested-by' tag in the patch description; note, your name and email >> address will then end up in the commit history and can not be removed >> there" is sufficient "permission" as well. > > For me, it sounds reasonable to accept a public reply about someone > testing a patch as a reason to add a tested-by tag. Yet, I don't add > tested-by myself based on replies. What I do when someone sends > a reply saying that the patch was tested is to request the tester to > reply with a tested-by with a short description about the test scenario. > > IMO it is important to ask it to the tester, not only to have an explicit > tag, but also because as a simple tested-by without a test scenario is > usually not very useful. I see your point, but I'd say it is useful enough: if that patch causes a regression you immediately know whom to CC to test a fix for that regression. But maybe my view is just biased here. ;-) Ciao, Thorsten
