[patch] Documentation/SubmittingPatches: Reported-by tags and permission

Jonathan Corbet corbet at lwn.net
Tue Oct 28 17:41:35 UTC 2014

On Tue, 28 Oct 2014 12:58:27 -0400
Jason Cooper <jason at lakedaemon.net> wrote:

> At the risk of upsetting the apple cart, I'd prefer we downplay anything
> that walks down the path of gamification (by focusing on credit).
> As best anyone has ever explained it to me, the Acked-by, Reviewed-by,
> etc are there to impart information regarding a specific commit.  In the
> event that a commit is fingered in a bisect, you have a much better list
> of names to Cc, instead of just the maintainer from MAINTAINERS and the
> author from the top of the offending file.  The author has often moved
> on, and the maintainer may not have been around for the bugfix.

As I understand it, having been in the room when these tags were
developed and encouraged, was that credit was a big part of the initial
motivation.  We need more testers and bug reporters; this was a way to
give them credit for the valuable work that they do.  I still think
that's important, for whatever that's worth.

> I know Greg has spoken out against gamification before, and I also
> understand the desire to encourage bug reporters.  Perhaps I should just
> suggest the following:
> """
> The Reported-by tag helps us maintain contact info for people with
> intimate knowledge of a commit or a bug fix.  Please seek the reporter's
> permission before adding the tag to the commit.  That said, if we
> diligently credit our bug reporters, they will, hopefully, be inspired
> to help us again in the future.
> """

That addresses my concern, but loses the point of the initial patch:
publicly reporting a bug can be seen as implicit permission to credit the



More information about the devel mailing list