On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 6:09 PM, Christophe Fergeau <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Vincent, > > 2009/4/22 Vincent Untz <[email protected]> >> >> - When committing code on behalf of others use the --author option, e.g. >> git commit -a --author "Joe Coder <[email protected]>" and --signoff. >> >> ======================================================== >> >> >> Opinions? > > Not sure about the --signoff part. The committer email/name is already > silently added to the commit by git even when using --author. Moreover, When > reading the "12) Sign your work " section of SubmittingPatches from the > linux kernel source ( > http://lxr.linux.no/linux/Documentation/SubmttingPatches ), it seems to me > that using SignedOffBy is useless if the initial author of the patch didn't > use it : > > "The sign-off is a simple line at the end of the explanation for the patch, > which certifies that you wrote it or otherwise have the right to pass it on > as a open-source patch." (snipped a lot of explanations after this sentence)
s-o-b lines are useful if you are following a chain-of-trust model. If you wrote the patch, you add your s-o-b, if you reviewed the patch and think it's ok, then you add your s-o-b too. The commit that goes into the main repo will end up having multiple s-o-b lines and if something goes wrong all the people in the s-o-b are to blame. If you commit a patch without reviewing it fully, then don't add your s-o-b. In a distributed model the s-o-b lines help people to decide whether or not to pick commits from other repositories or a mailing list. The more distributed, the more you need s-o-b lines. In GNOME perhaps the needs doesn't seem too high right now, but think about a patch that was developed collaboratively by 4, or 5 people. A single 'committer' and 'author' field is not enough to represent what really happened. -- Felipe Contreras _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
