11/05/2022 12:28, Stanisław Kardach: > On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 10:09 AM Morten Brørup <m...@smartsharesystems.com> > wrote: > > > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:tho...@monjalon.net] > > > 09/05/2022 14:24, Stanisław Kardach: > > > > On Fri, May 6, 2022 at 11:13 AM David Marchand wrote: > > > > > About the new "Sponsored-by" tag, it should not raise warnings in > > > > > the CI if we agree on its addition. > > > > > > > > I'll modify it in V2 to be in form of: > > > > Sponsored by: StarFive Technology > > > > > > You mean removing the hyphen? > > > I think it is better to keep it so all tags have the same format. > > > > I agree with Thomas. Please keep the hyphen. > > > > > > ... > > > > Signed-off-by: ... > > > > > > > > This was suggested by Stephen Hemminger as having a precedent in > > > > Linux kernel. Interestingly enough first use of this tag in kernel > > > > source was this year in January. > > > > I don't get it! Should employees start adding > > Sponsored-by: <Employer name> to their commits, > > when doing it as part of their job? > > And how about contract developers, should they also add a > > Sponsored-by: <Company name> tag, > > since they are working under contract and getting paid by that company?
Nothing is mandatory. It is just a way to give visibility of the sponsorship if requested. > If I understand correctly, the concern about the commit log staying > technical and not introducing extra elements not beneficial to the > project, correct? > In the scope of this particular patchset, the companies sponsoring the > work are in copyrights for appropriate files, so I can remove the > tags. > For my own curiosity, what would be a proper way for a contract > developer to mark the company sponsoring the work? Some companies may > not care, others will. Maybe it would be beneficial to add a comment > on this into the contributing guide (or it's already there and I've > missed it)? I don't know how to do it better. Any other suggestions?
