On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 01:14:17PM +0200, Diego Biurrun wrote: > On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 01:24:56PM +0300, Felipe Contreras wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 1:30 AM, Diego Biurrun <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 03:05:14PM +0000, Ronald S. Bultje wrote: > > >> > > >> On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 2:56 PM, Luca Barbato <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > On 4/26/11 4:47 PM, Diego Biurrun wrote: > > >> >> I am confused whether or not I should signoff patches and/or signoff > > >> >> my own patches. Currently we have a mix of both taking place. > > >> >> What's the best way to proceed? > > >> > > > >> > I'd singoff only the patches from others you push and not signoff your > > >> > own > > >> > patches. > > >> > > >> +1. > > >> > > >> If you sign off your own patches, you're essentially saying you can't > > >> trust your own patches. > > > > > > I thought it could be interpreted as a chain of trust kind of thing. > > > I think it is used that way in the Linux kernel. AFAIK all patch > > > submitters sign off their own patches there. > > > > That's right. > > > > > I don't particularly care which way we handle it, but this seemed > > > worth pointing out... > > > > I prefer to always s-o-b patches. > > s-o-b?
signed-off-by That should have been kind of obvious... Diego _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
