On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 11:29:52AM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 10:50 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > Another issue, should we require "Signed-off-by:" lines? At least > > for things that are contributed by users? > > > > … > > Thanks for bringing this up. I had circulated the start of a > proposal on this a year ago: > http://dev.gentoo.org/~rich0/copyrightpolicy.xml
The (c) clause (“I got this patch from someone else who'd signed the DCO for it”) leads to chains like: Signed-off-by: A. U. Thor <aut...@example.com> Signed-off-by: Some Maintainer <smaintai...@example.com> … as the patch percolates up to the main repository. In Gentoo, that's probably going to be just a Gentoo dev, or an external contributor plus a Gentoo dev. The multiple-signoffs version is not going to play well with signed commits, because if A. U. Thor signed his commit (with just his Signed-off-by), Some Maintainer will not be able to add her Signed-off-by without dropping Thor's commit signature. My suggested solution here is to take the same approach we're suggesting for commit signatures, and just have the maintainer add their Signed-off-by to an explicit merge commit pulling in the contributor's work. Cheers, Trevor -- This email may be signed or encrypted with GnuPG (http://www.gnupg.org). For more information, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
