git: 5fe433a6e4d8 - main - netgraph/ng_nat: Add RFC 6598/Carrier Grade NAT support

[Kyle Evans]

On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 1:59 PM Jessica Clarke <jrtc27 at freebsd.org> wrote:
>
> On 27 Jan 2021, at 19:55, John Baldwin <jhb at freebsd.org> wrote:
> > On 1/24/21 11:51 AM, Kyle Evans wrote:
> >> On Sun, Jan 24, 2021 at 1:47 PM Lutz Donnerhacke <lutz at donnerhacke.de> wrote:
> >> We switched up the recommendations[0][1] to advocate for what you've
> >> done here ~2 weeks ago -- so yes, this is good. :-)
> >
> > Note that "Submitted by" may still be needed when there are multiple
> > authors who contribute to a patch.  (And I do kind of think pulling
> > it from the template was a bit hasty as it didn't take those cases
> > into account.)  I do think we want Author to reflect the primary
> > author of the change though.
>
> The git world (or at least the GitHub world) seems to be settling in
> Co-authored-by: for that, which is more accurate.
>

Indeed, whoops- I hadn't thought of specifically noting something for
co-authors. =-(

I agree with switching to Co-authored-by; some tooling (e.g. GitHub,
GitLab) will recognize this and do something appropriate with it if it
can identify the coauthors. IMO "Submitted by" is an awkward verbiage
for this, as "submitted" would (to me) typically imply the very
specific action of presenting the patch and working it through the
system (i.e. reviews), and these sets of people don't always match.
That's getting pretty pedantic, but I suspect I'm not the only one
that makes this kind of association and "co-authors" more clearly
spells out how these individuals may be related w.r.t. any given patch
in a more objective fashion.

Thanks,

Kyle Evans