On 09/11/2017 11:44, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Thu, Nov 09, 2017 at 10:45:27AM +0100, Daniel Lezcano wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >> I noticed a practice when the patches are submitted where I'm a bit >> confused about how it fits with the DCO. >> >> People are creating gmail accounts to send patches on behalf of their >> company because the company's email configuration does not allow to send >> patches or adds extra infos, or whatever... >> >> That ends up with patches submitted by a gmail account with no history >> and verifiable origin and new files containing a company copyright [1]. > > If there is a question, just ask. > >> At the first glance I would say, it is not allowed, and if a company is >> willing to do opensource, it should provide the tools to its employees >> to do so. But I don't want block patch submission if this practice is >> tolerated. > > Fixing the use of a company's email server is outside of almost all > Linux kernel divisions. As one such example, Red Hat has a system that > messes with patches :) > > I only know of one company that uses Exchange that has "fixed it" enough > to allow their developers to send patches out that are not corrupted > (and no, it's not Microsoft). Preventing all of those companies, or > those that use Lotus Notes, or any other horrid email system, from > contributing to kernel development is not a good idea. > >> What is the policy in this case ? > > I just ask all new contributors who they work for, and so we then know, > it's not that big of a deal.
Thanks for your quick answer and clarification. -- Danie -- <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook | <http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter | <http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog