Point out that explicit permission is usually needed to tag other people in changes, but mention that implicit permission can be sufficient in certain cases. This fixes slight inconsistencies between Reported-by: and Suggested-by: and makes the usage more intuitive. While at it, explicitly mention the dangers of our bugzilla instance, as it makes it easy to forget that email addresses visible there are only shown to logged-in users. The latter is not a theoretical issue, as one maintainer mentioned that his employer received a EU GDPR (general data protection regulation) complaint after exposing a email address used in bugzilla through a tag in a patch description. Cc: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Cc: Simona Vetter <simona.vetter@xxxxxxxx> Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@xxxxxxxxxx> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- Note: this triggers a few checkpatch.pl complaints that are irrelevant when when to comes to changes like this. v3: - try yet again from a slightly different angle which loosens the rules slightly. This from review feedback to earlier versions is apparently what other developers want and from their "no lawyer" perspective consider to be okay. As IANAL myself I don't feel totally comfortable with this and have no idea if this legally is sound, so tag patch with "DONOTMERGE" for now; will remove this for v4 if enough people add a "Reviewed-by". Otherwise the story of this patch might end here, unless someone else submits it for inclusion (you are free to do so!). - remote patch adding Suggested-by: tag to 5.Posting and submit it separately v2: https://lore.kernel.org/all/cover.1731749544.git.linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/ - Retry differently. This slightly hardens the rule for Reported-by: while slightly lessening it for Suggested-by:. Those in the end are quite similar, so it does not make much sense to apply different ones. I considered using an approach along the lines of "if you reported it in pubic by mail, implicit permission to use in a tag is granted"; but I abstained from it, as I assume there are good reasons for the existing approach regarding Suggested-by:. - CC all the people that provided feedback on the text changes in v1 v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/f5bc0639a20d6fac68062466d5e3dd0519588d08.1731486825.git.linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/ - initial version --- Documentation/process/5.Posting.rst | 13 +++++-- Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst | 39 ++++++++++++++------ 2 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) diff --git a/Documentation/process/5.Posting.rst b/Documentation/process/5.Posting.rst index b3eff03ea2491c..73961565040ed8 100644 --- a/Documentation/process/5.Posting.rst +++ b/Documentation/process/5.Posting.rst @@ -264,10 +264,15 @@ 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 tags to your patches, as all except for Cc:, +Reported-by:, and Suggested-by: need explicit permission of the person named. +For the three aforementioned ones 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. Sending the patch diff --git a/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst b/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst index 1518bd57adab50..9d26a4b7ca8ba3 100644 --- a/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst +++ b/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst @@ -481,10 +481,10 @@ list archives. If a person has had the opportunity to comment on a patch, but has not provided such comments, you may optionally add a ``Cc:`` tag to the patch. -This is the only tag which might be added without an explicit action by the -person it names - but it should indicate that this person was copied on the -patch. This tag documents that potentially interested parties -have been included in the discussion. +This tag documents that potentially interested parties have been included in +the discussion. Note, this is one of only three tags you might be able to use +without explicit permission of the person named (see 'Tagging people requires +permission' below for details). Co-developed-by: states that the patch was co-created by multiple developers; it is used to give attribution to co-authors (in addition to the author @@ -530,9 +530,9 @@ hopefully inspires them to help us again in the future. The tag is intended for bugs; please do not use it to credit feature requests. The tag should be followed by a Closes: tag pointing to the report, unless the report is not available on the web. The Link: tag can be used instead of Closes: if the patch -fixes a part of the issue(s) being reported. Please note that if the bug was -reported in private, then ask for permission first before using the Reported-by -tag. +fixes a part of the issue(s) being reported. Note, the Reported-by tag is one +of only three tags you might be able to use without explicit permission of the +person named (see 'Tagging people requires permission' below for details). A Tested-by: tag indicates that the patch has been successfully tested (in some environment) by the person named. This tag informs maintainers that @@ -582,11 +582,11 @@ Usually removal of someone's Tested-by or Reviewed-by tags should be mentioned in the patch changelog (after the '---' separator). A Suggested-by: tag indicates that the patch idea is suggested by the person -named and ensures credit to the person for the idea. Please note that this -tag should not be added without the reporter's permission, especially if the -idea was not posted in a public forum. That said, if we diligently credit our -idea reporters, they will, hopefully, be inspired to help us again in the -future. +named and ensures credit to the person for the idea: if we diligently credit +our idea reporters, they will, hopefully, be inspired to help us again in the +future. Note, this is one of only three tags you might be able to use without +explicit permission of the person named (see 'Tagging people requires +permission' below for details). A Fixes: tag indicates that the patch fixes an issue in a previous commit. It is used to make it easy to determine where a bug originated, which can help @@ -600,6 +600,21 @@ process nor the requirement to Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on all stable patch candidates. For more information, please read Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst. +.. _tagging_people: + +Tagging people requires permission +---------------------------------- + +Be careful in the addition of tags to your patches, as all except for Cc:, +Reported-by:, and Suggested-by: need explicit permission of the person named. +For the three aforementioned ones 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. + .. _the_canonical_patch_format: The canonical patch format base-commit: 83a474c11e8cb59e230a43365cb42fa00d3bddaa -- 2.45.0
