On 30.10.2015 02:49, Matt Turner wrote: > On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 10:15 AM, Grazvydas Ignotas <nota...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 6:21 PM, Emil Velikov <emil.l.veli...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> On 29 October 2015 at 15:22, Emmanuel Gil Peyrot >>> <emmanuel.pey...@collabora.com> wrote: >>>> This was causing compilation issues when one of its providers wasn’t >>>> already included before gbm.h. >>> Cc: "11.0" <mesa-sta...@lists.freedesktop.org> >>> Reviewed-by: Emil Velikov <emil.veli...@collabora.com> >>> >>> I'll push this later on today. For future patches please include your >>> s-o-b line. >> >> Some of you keep insisting on adding s-o-b while the site says it's >> not needed ( http://www.mesa3d.org/devinfo.html , "Patch formatting"). >> Maybe devinfo.html should be updated? > > I think it's kind of meaningless without an explanation of what it > means. The Linux kernel has a "Developer Certificate of Origin" in > Documentation/SubmittingPatches that explains what it means in that > context. > > I'm not sure what lead the Linux community to create that and require > S-o-b and the certificate of origin.
It was a reaction to the SCO lawsuit, to prevent doubts about the provenance of code. -- Earthling Michel Dänzer | http://www.amd.com Libre software enthusiast | Mesa and X developer _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
