Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: allow tags between co-developed-by and their sign-off

[Sean Christopherson]

+Mateusz

On Mon, Oct 23, 2023, Przemek Kitszel wrote:
> Additional tags between Co-developed-by and corresponding Signed-off-by
> could include Reviewed-by tags collected by Submitter, which is also
> a Co-developer, but should sign-off at the very end of tags provided by
> the Submitter.

...

> Mateusz Polchlopek <mateusz.polchlopek@xxxxxxxxx> has reported this to me.

Heh, there's a tag for that...

  Reported-by: Mateusz Polchlopek <mateusz.polchlopek@xxxxxxxxx>

And it's usually a good idea to Cc the reporter in case there are questions they
can help answer.

> @@ -509,16 +509,18 @@ Example of a patch submitted by the From: author::
>  	Signed-off-by: Second Co-Author <second@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>  	Signed-off-by: From Author <from@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>  
> -Example of a patch submitted by a Co-developed-by: author::
> +Example of a patch submitted by a Co-developed-by: author, who also collected
> +a Reviewed-by: tag posted for earlier version::
>  
>  	From: From Author <from@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>  
>  	<changelog>
>  
>  	Co-developed-by: Random Co-Author <random@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>  	Signed-off-by: Random Co-Author <random@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>  	Signed-off-by: From Author <from@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>  	Co-developed-by: Submitting Co-Author <sub@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> +	Reviewed-by: Some Reviewer <srev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>  	Signed-off-by: Submitting Co-Author <sub@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

This is silly.  Allowing tags in-between Co-developed-by with Signed-off-by
unnecessarily complicates things, e.g. people already miss/forget the rule about
tightly coupling Co-developed-by with Signed-off-by.

And if we're being super pedantic about chronological history, arguably the
Reviewed-by should come before the Co-developed-by as adding the Reviewed-by is
a (trivial) modification to the patch that was done by the submitter.