On Wed, 28 Nov 2018 at 14:29, Eric Engestrom <eric.engest...@intel.com> wrote: > > On Wednesday, 2018-11-28 01:18:16 -0800, Jordan Justen wrote: > > On 2018-11-28 00:47:25, Erik Faye-Lund wrote: > > > On Tue, 2018-11-27 at 23:20 -0800, Jordan Justen wrote: > > > > This adds the "Developer's Certificate of Origin 1.1" from the Linux > > > > kernel. It indicates that by using Signed-off-by you are certifying > > > > that your patch meets the DCO 1.1 guidelines. > > > > > > > > It also changes Signed-off-by from being optional to being required. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jordan Justen <jordan.l.jus...@intel.com> > > > > Cc: Matt Turner <matts...@gmail.com> > > > > --- > > > > docs/submittingpatches.html | 52 > > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- > > > > 1 file changed, 51 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/docs/submittingpatches.html > > > > b/docs/submittingpatches.html > > > > index 9ae750d5a15..6d506b3691b 100644 > > > > --- a/docs/submittingpatches.html > > > > +++ b/docs/submittingpatches.html > > > > @@ -20,6 +20,8 @@ > > > > <ul> > > > > <li><a href="#guidelines">Basic guidelines</a> > > > > <li><a href="#formatting">Patch formatting</a> > > > > +<li><a href="#signing">Patch Signing</a> (Signed-off-by, Developer's > > > > + Certificate of Origin) > > > > <li><a href="#testing">Testing Patches</a> > > > > <li><a href="#mailing">Mailing Patches</a> > > > > <li><a href="#reviewing">Reviewing Patches</a> > > > > @@ -73,7 +75,9 @@ if needed. For example: > > > > is necessary, and removing it causes no regressions in piglit on > > > > any > > > > platform. > > > > </pre> > > > > -<li>A "Signed-off-by:" line is not required, but not discouraged > > > > either. > > > > +<li>A "Signed-off-by:" line is <strong>required</strong>. The format > > > > +and meaning of Signed-off-by is documented below in > > > > +the <a href="#signing">patch signing</a> section. > > > > <li>If a patch addresses a bugzilla issue, that should be noted in > > > > the > > > > patch comment. For example: > > > > <pre> > > > > @@ -129,7 +133,53 @@ Please use common sense and do > > > > <strong>not</strong> blindly add everyone. > > > > </pre> > > > > </ul> > > > > > > > > +<h2 id="signing"> > > > > + Patch Signing (Signed-off-by, Developer's Certificate of Origin) > > > > +</h2> > > > > > > > > +<p> > > > > + As described in the <a href="#formatting">patch formatting</a> > > > > + section, you must sign your patch by including Signed-off-by in > > > > the > > > > + patch commit message. The Signed-off-by must include your real > > > > name > > > > + and email address in this format: > > > > +</p> > > > > +<pre> > > > > + Signed-off-by: Joe Hacker <jhac...@foo.com> > > > > +</pre> > > > > +<p> > > > > + By adding Signed-of-by to your contributed patch, you certify that > > > > + your contribution meets the guidelines of the Developer's > > > > + Certificate of Origin: > > > > +</p> > > > > + > > > > +<pre> > > > > +Developer's Certificate of Origin 1.1 > > > > +------------------------------------- > > > > + > > > > +By making a contribution to this project, I certify that: > > > > + > > > > + (a) The contribution was created in whole or in part by me and I > > > > + have the right to submit it under the open source license > > > > + indicated in the file; or > > > > + > > > > + (b) The contribution is based upon previous work that, to the best > > > > + of my knowledge, is covered under an appropriate open source > > > > + license and I have the right under that license to submit that > > > > + work with modifications, whether created in whole or in part > > > > + by me, under the same open source license (unless I am > > > > + permitted to submit under a different license), as indicated > > > > + in the file; or > > > > + > > > > + (c) The contribution was provided directly to me by some other > > > > + person who certified (a), (b) or (c) and I have not modified > > > > + it. > > > > + > > > > + (d) I understand and agree that this project and the contribution > > > > + are public and that a record of the contribution (including all > > > > + personal information I submit with it, including my sign-off) > > > > is > > > > + maintained indefinitely and may be redistributed consistent > > > > with > > > > + this project or the open source license(s) involved. > > > > +</pre> > > > > > > I don't think you can legally copy parts for this file, but not all of > > > it, due to this text (from here: https://developercertificate.org/) > > > > > > "Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies of this > > > license document, but changing it is not allowed." > > > > > > Removing that text (and the copyright statement above it), is changing > > > it. > > > > It came from the kernel Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst, > > which doesn't have that specific text about "verbatim copies". I guess > > you prefer we copy it from https://developercertificate.org/? > > > > > I would propose you add it as a separate file and link that, to avoid > > > confusion about what "this license document" refers to. > > > > I do see that Eclipse had it on a page with other content. Although, > > the main focus of the page is the DCO. > > https://www.eclipse.org/legal/DCO.php > > > > It doesn't look like https://developercertificate.org/ has a filename > > associated with the content. So, something like docs/dco.txt or > > docs/developer-certificate-of-origin.txt? > > If we need to have a local copy, then I'd prefer a verbose name (so 2nd > option), but can't we simply link to it? > > By adding Signed-of-by to your contributed patch, you certify that > your contribution meets the guidelines of the > <a href="https://developercertificate.org";>Developer's Certificate > of Origin</a>. > > Other than that, both the 'optional' and 'required' wordings look good > to me, and I have no preference between the two; I've always signed my > mesa commits with the understanding that it had the DCO meaning anyway. > > With either the full-text-copy in a verbose filename, or a simple link, > and for either the 'optional' or the 'required' wording, this is: > Reviewed-by: Eric Engestrom <eric.engest...@intel.com>
Perfectly said Eric. I'm on the same page - with either a full copy or a link the patch is Reviewed-by: Emil Velikov <emil.veli...@collabora.com> Thanks for doing this Jordan. -Emil _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
