Am 03.09.2020 um 15:36 hat Fabian Grünbichler geschrieben: > On September 3, 2020 3:23 pm, Kevin Wolf wrote: > > Am 03.09.2020 um 14:57 hat Max Reitz geschrieben: > >> On 03.09.20 14:38, Kevin Wolf wrote: > >> > Am 03.09.2020 um 13:04 hat Max Reitz geschrieben: > >> >> On 03.09.20 12:13, Fabian Grünbichler wrote: > >> >>> On August 21, 2020 3:03 pm, Max Reitz wrote: > >> >>>> On 18.02.20 11:07, Fabian Grünbichler wrote: > >> >>> I am not sure how > >> >>> the S-O-B by John is supposed to enter the mix - should I just include > >> >>> it in the squashed patch (which would be partly authored, but > >> >>> not-yet-signed-off by him otherwise?)? > >> >> > >> >> I’m not too sure on the proceedings, actually. I think it should be > >> >> fine if you put his S-o-b there, as long as your patch is somehow based > >> >> on a patch that he sent earlier with his S-o-b underneath. But I’m not > >> >> sure. > >> > > >> > Signed-off-by means that John certifies the DCO for the patch (at least > >> > the original version that you possibly modified), so you cannot just add > >> > it without asking him. > >> > >> But what if you take a patch from someone and heavily modify it – > >> wouldn’t you keep the original S-o-b and explain the modifications in > >> the commit message? > > > > Ah, if that patch already had a S-o-b, then yes. You keep it not only to > > show who touched the patch, but also because your own S-o-b depends on > > the one from the original author (you only have the rights to contribute > > it because the original author had them and could pass them on to you). > > > > I thought it was based on a patch that came without S-o-b. > > it is (taken from John's git, with his approval, and implicit admission > that S-O-B is just missing because it was a WIP branch/tree that I > started from). that was also the reason why I kept that patch unmodified > and sent my modifications as patches on-top, to make it easier for John > to verify that that one patch is his original WIP one and add this > missing S-O-B ;)
Yeah, then John should just reply to the patch and add the S-o-b. Complications like this are why I always use 'git commit -s' and have it already in my development branches rather than only adding it when preparing the patch emails to send. Kevin