On Sun, Feb 11, 2007 at 03:42:43AM +0100, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> >> If you don't sign off on something, you can't put it
> >> into the public tree -- that's the whole philosophy
> >> behind the DCO, to have all contributions traceable
> >> to their origins, by having a "trail of bread crumbs".
>> If you don't sign off on something, you can't put it
>> into the public tree -- that's the whole philosophy
>> behind the DCO, to have all contributions traceable
>> to their origins, by having a "trail of bread crumbs".
>
> Note I did not write the patch and the original author has of course
>
On Sun, Feb 11, 2007 at 02:42:03AM +0100, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> >>> Ie. if I review and then commit, should I sign off or ack?
> >>
> >> Sign off.
> >
> > I would say ack, but not necessarily sign off.
>
> If you don't sign off on something, you can't put it
> into the public tree -- that's
Ie. if I review and then commit, should I sign off or ack?
>>>
>>> Sign off.
>>
>> I would say ack, but not necessarily sign off.
>
> I guess Segher's point is that committing a patch sent to the mailing
> list falls under (c) in the DCO, so I should sign off. Is the mailing
> list really "dir
>>> Ie. if I review and then commit, should I sign off or ack?
>>
>> Sign off.
>
> I would say ack, but not necessarily sign off.
If you don't sign off on something, you can't put it
into the public tree -- that's the whole philosophy
behind the DCO, to have all contributions traceable
to their or
Thanks for the comments!
On Sat, Feb 10, 2007 at 08:58:23PM +0100, Stefan Reinauer wrote:
> > > Does commiting constitute "on the path pushing it in" ?
> >
> > Yes. Read the DCO if you're still unsure :-)
>
> DCO? Is that an abbreviation for
> http://www.linuxbios.org/Development_Guidelines?
* Segher Boessenkool <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070210 20:13]:
> >> Signed-off-by means "I am (in part) responsible for this
> >> ending up in thid repo", i.e., you wrote part of the patch
> >> or you were on the path pushing it in.
> >>
> >> Acked-by is used as a comment "looks fine by me" when not
> >>
>> Signed-off-by means "I am (in part) responsible for this
>> ending up in thid repo", i.e., you wrote part of the patch
>> or you were on the path pushing it in.
>>
>> Acked-by is used as a comment "looks fine by me" when not
>> taking direct action yourself.
>
> Does commiting constitute "on the
Peter Stuge wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 09, 2007 at 06:26:09PM +0100, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>> Signed-off-by means "I am (in part) responsible for this
>> ending up in thid repo", i.e., you wrote part of the patch
>> or you were on the path pushing it in.
>>
>> Acked-by is used as a comment "looks fin
