| Summary: | patchtest didn't report that the patch was still authored by AUH | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Yocto Project Subprojects] Patchwork/Patchtest | Reporter: | Michael Opdenacker <michael.opdenacker> | ||||
| Component: | Patchtest | Assignee: | Trevor Gamblin <tgamblin> | ||||
| Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | QA Contact: | |||||
| Severity: | normal | ||||||
| Priority: | Medium+ | CC: | michael.opdenacker, randy.macleod | ||||
| Version: | 5.1 | ||||||
| Target Milestone: | 5.1 M3 | ||||||
| Hardware: | x86 | ||||||
| OS: | Multiple | ||||||
| Whiteboard: | |||||||
| OS type for building Yocto: | --- | Type of Regression: | --- | ||||
| Verified: | Documentation change: | No (bug/feature does not impact docs) | |||||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||
|
Description
Michael Opdenacker
2024-02-08 09:21:13 UTC
I'm not totally sure this is a bad thing - do we want to completely omit mention of the AUH patch origin, or do we just want some confidence that the submitter actually tested a patch that they may have taken from AUH? In the example attached here, the mbox's "From:" line is the submitter, but there's a second "From: <auh_email>" in the body (the bigger issue is that the S-O-B is missing!). I think this should be fine, but maybe not? |