Paul, On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 02:04:15PM -0700, Paul Burton <paul.bur...@mips.com> wrote: > Hi Serge, > > On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 10:13:54PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 10:59:40AM -0700, Paul Burton > > <paul.bur...@mips.com> wrote: > > > However FYI for next time - you shouldn't really add someone else's > > > Signed-off-by tag anyway. The tag effectively states that a person can > > > agree to the Developer's Certificate of Origin for this patch (see > > > Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst), and you can't agree that > > > on behalf of someone else. Generally a maintainer should add this tag > > > for themselves when they apply a patch. > > > > I'm sorry if it seemed like I added Signed-off on your behalf. > > That's OK, I didn't think you did it maliciously :) > > > I thought the Signed-off also concerns the ones, who participated in > > the patch preparation. Since you suggested the design of the change, > > I've decided to put your name in the Signed-off tag. What shall I use > > in this way then? > > In this case Suggested-by might have been a good choice. Reported-by is > also commonly used if someone reported a problem which you created a fix > for. > > Section 13 of Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst describes > these tags along with a couple others.
I always thought of these tags as something more like a formality. In fact this hasn't been my first patchset sent to the kernel e-mailing list. Although all of the previous ones didn't involve someone else participating in the changes development, except the reviewers of course. So I do aware of all the tags mentioned in the doc. But as it turns out I didn't fully understand their meaning. Main rule: most of the tags should not be added without the permission, except more or less formal CC and Fixes ones. Anyway thanks for the advice. Next time I'll be more careful with it. Regards, -Sergey > > Thanks, > Paul