* On Wednesday 27 Aug 2008 19:16:40 Muli Ben-Yehuda wrote: > On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 03:48:54PM +0300, Ben-Ami Yassour1 wrote: > > On Tue, 2008-08-26 at 18:29 +0300, Amit Shah wrote: > > > From: Or Sagi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > From: Nir Peleg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > From: Amit Shah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > From: Ben-Ami Yassour <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > From: Glauber de Oliveira Costa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Hey Amit, > > In addition to Ben's other comments, note that git only uses the first > From: line as the author of the patch, and the rest are meaningless > from git's point of view. With a patch such as this where there were
That's right; this is just a way to mention authorship (instead of based on..) > multiple authors, I would pick one person (whoever wrote the bulk of > the patch) as the author, and then acknowledge the rest in the > changelog comment, "based on a patch by ...", etc. > > Also, if that person's patch had a Signed-off by, you should include > that too. Or at least that's how I understand it. I won't say so. Let's say X sends a patch which Y picks up and add changes which X doesn't approve or can't ascertain the source of (Y could have copied them from somewhere else). It should just contain Y's sign-off. The Sign-off was introduced to trace the flow of patches from individual authors to people forwarding them onwards. If something is found to be wrong with a patch that was submitted, the person listed first in the Signed-off-by series will be held accountable. Amit -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
