Signed-off-by vs Reviewed-by

2016-03-31 Thread Miklos Vajna
Hi, Some projects like LibreOffice don't use Signed-off-by, instead usually use Gerrit for code review, and reviewers add a Reviewed-by line when they are OK with a patch. In this workflow it's a bit unfortunate that adding a Signed-off-by line is just a command-line switch, but adding a Reviewed

Re: Signed-off-by vs Reviewed-by

2016-03-31 Thread Pranit Bauva
On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 6:05 PM, Miklos Vajna wrote: > Hi, > > Some projects like LibreOffice don't use Signed-off-by, instead usually > use Gerrit for code review, and reviewers add a Reviewed-by line when > they are OK with a patch. In this workflow it's a bit unfortunate that > adding a Signed

Re: Signed-off-by vs Reviewed-by

2016-03-31 Thread Jeff King
On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 02:35:07PM +0200, Miklos Vajna wrote: > Hi, > > Some projects like LibreOffice don't use Signed-off-by, instead usually > use Gerrit for code review, and reviewers add a Reviewed-by line when > they are OK with a patch. In this workflow it's a bit unfortunate that > addin

Re: Signed-off-by vs Reviewed-by

2016-03-31 Thread Miklos Vajna
Hi, On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 07:54:47PM +0530, Pranit Bauva wrote: > Are you suggesting to use a different email address for commiting, > signing off and reviewing? Let's say project A has a workflow where patch authors and maintainers add a "Signed-off-by: A B " line. This is well-supported by

Re: Signed-off-by vs Reviewed-by

2016-03-31 Thread Sidhant Sharma
Hi, On Thursday 31 March 2016 08:05 PM, Miklos Vajna wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 07:54:47PM +0530, Pranit Bauva > wrote: >> Are you suggesting to use a different email address for commiting, >> signing off and reviewing? > Let's say project A has a workflow where patch authors and m

Re: Signed-off-by vs Reviewed-by

2016-03-31 Thread Christian Couder
On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 4:32 PM, Jeff King wrote: > On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 02:35:07PM +0200, Miklos Vajna wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Some projects like LibreOffice don't use Signed-off-by, instead usually >> use Gerrit for code review, and reviewers add a Reviewed-by line when >> they are OK with a pa

Re: Signed-off-by vs Reviewed-by

2016-03-31 Thread Christian Couder
On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 4:57 PM, Sidhant Sharma wrote: > Hi, > > On Thursday 31 March 2016 08:05 PM, Miklos Vajna wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 07:54:47PM +0530, Pranit Bauva >> wrote: >>> Are you suggesting to use a different email address for commiting, >>> signing off and review

Re: Signed-off-by vs Reviewed-by

2016-03-31 Thread Junio C Hamano
Miklos Vajna writes: > Typing that line (including copy&pasting your name + email all the time) > is a bit boring. I think the last message from Christian in the thread points at the right direction in the future. The internal "parse the existing trailer block and manipulate it by adding, condi

Re: Signed-off-by vs Reviewed-by

2016-03-31 Thread Jeff King
On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 09:28:44AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > As to the last step of "integration", we cannot use short-and-sweet > single letter options like '-s' (for sign-off) for each and every > custom trailer different projects use for their own purpose (as > there are only 26 of the low

Re: Signed-off-by vs Reviewed-by

2016-03-31 Thread Junio C Hamano
Jeff King writes: > On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 09:28:44AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> As to the last step of "integration", we cannot use short-and-sweet >> single letter options like '-s' (for sign-off) for each and every >> custom trailer different projects use for their own purpose (as >> t

Re: Signed-off-by vs Reviewed-by

2016-04-01 Thread Miklos Vajna
Hi, On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 09:28:44AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > The internal "parse the existing trailer block and manipulate it by > adding, conditionally adding, replacing and deleting it" logic was > done as an experimental "interpret-trailers" program, but polishing > it (both its desi