On Thu, Mar 08, 2018 at 11:18:30AM +0000, Michael Clark wrote: > On Fri, 9 Mar 2018 at 12:10 AM, Michael Clark <m...@sifive.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, 8 Mar 2018 at 11:02 PM, Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> > > wrote: > > > >> On 6 March 2018 at 19:46, Michael Clark <m...@sifive.com> wrote: > >> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >> > Hash: SHA1 > >> > > >> > The following changes since commit > >> f32408f3b472a088467474ab152be3b6285b2d7b: > >> > > >> > misc: don't use hwaddr as a type in trace events (2018-03-06 14:24:30 > >> +0000) > >> > > >> > are available in the git repository at: > >> > > >> > https://github.com/riscv/riscv-qemu.git tags/riscv-qemu-upstream-v8.2 > >> > > >> > for you to fetch changes up to 7051b081bf6796e5e84406f6223a7c4900bf7298: > >> > > >> > RISC-V - Remove support for adhoc non-standard X_COP local-interrupt > >> (2018-03-07 08:36:03 +1300) > >> > >> > >> Hi -- I would have applied this, but some of the commits > >> have no signed-off-by lines. > >> > >> This is important, and I've already asked for it once. We cannot > >> accept anything that doesn't have a clear record in the commit > >> message of everybody (person or company) who's contributed code > >> to it, indicating that they're happy for their copyrighted > >> contributions to be taken into QEMU under our license. Lists > >> of names without emails in the cover letter are not sufficient. > >> > >> In fact a lot of the last part of this patchset looks like > >> unreviewed changes/fixes that if we were going to have them we > >> should have squashed into the correct patches and resent the > >> series for review. Please don't do this. Code review is an > >> important part of how the QEMU project works. > > > > > > You must be looking at the wrong tag. There are multiple sign-offs in all > > 23 commits. The tag is riscv-qemu-upstream-v8.2. Sagar and Bastian > > contacted me out of band to add their sign-offs. Please look at the commits > > again and tell me which commit id doesn’t have a sign-off on that tag (23 > > commits iirc) > > > > I can forward you the mail out-of-band. I had to contact contributors to > get them to agree to change the license from MIT to GPLv2, based on a > request from Red Hat. > > You are making this very hard. Do you work for Arm perchance? I really > wouldn’t be surprised if our port is being sandbagged by Arm. Apologies for > being so direct about this, but things like this happen... > > I have complied with practically every review request and the sign-offs are > there. It’s a bit ridiculous. > > It would be nice to find someone neutral, unrelated to Arm, to merge our PR
Please stop with these ridiculous conspiracy theories right away. It is a totally inappropriate and baseless accusation to make. Peter is not trying to punish you with extra rules. Over time QEMU has been raising the bar for *all* contributions with extra code style checks, automated testing, and review. Unfortunately this does mean that the larger the patch series / feature, the more work is required to get to a mergable state, especially if the contributors are not previously familiar with QEMU development. Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|