That wasn't my intent. When I commit my own changes, I simply push the commit that I generated the patch from instead of git applying the patch that I uploaded to JIRA.
I am personally in favor of keeping the (unwritten?) policy the way it is - that is, it's ok to commit to your patches, once they have gotten a +1 from another committer. On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 1:28 PM, Andrew Purtell <[email protected]> wrote: > Would a consequence of this be no committing of your own changes? Signing > off on your own commit wouldn't add any value. > > > > On Sun, Sep 8, 2013 at 6:03 PM, Mark Grover <[email protected]> wrote: > > > And, about your former point: > > > > Our git format-patch policy for patches ensures that the name of the > actual > > contributor who committed the code shows up on the commit message when > > doing git log. However, I think it will be useful to see which committer > > committed that patch on behalf of the contributor. That's exactly the > > problem "--sign-off" solves. > > > > Linux kernel< > > > http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/SubmittingPatches?id=HEAD > > >, > > for example, has a policy to use --sign-off flag and the same applies to > > contributing to the git > > project< > > > http://git.kernel.org/cgit/git/git.git/tree/Documentation/SubmittingPatches?id=HEAD > > > > > . > > And, there are some other benefits too, listed here: > > > > > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1962094/what-is-the-sign-off-feature-in-git-for > > > > Mark > > > > > > -- > Best regards, > > - Andy > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein > (via Tom White) >
