Hi, On Sun, Nov 05, 2006 at 10:32:59PM +0100, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > Signed-off-by: and Acked-by: always corresponds to the latest > added patch, unless otherwise noted. Since each patch and each > comment has a timestamp, everything is clear, right? > > So two patches by Uwe on a ticket with 3 comments -- yeah sure > we can handle that. Now how about a ticket with 12 proposed > patches by 4 people, each fixing part of the problem, some superseded > by newer patches; and all of that intermingled with some odd 100 > comments? Can you still align that so that you clearly see or supposed > "paper" track of origin of the code?
Where appropriate different issues should be "outsourced" to different tickets. Yes, there will probably be some tickets with a huge number of comments and patches. But that should be an exception. > Maybe this is all just a symptom of a greater problem: patches should > always be presented with a proposed check-in comment, and the > signed-off-by should be part of that comment. Yes, definately. I tried to do this for my last few patches already. It should be documented correctly in the development guidelines, though (those need some updates currently). Uwe. -- http://www.hermann-uwe.de | http://www.holsham-traders.de http://www.crazy-hacks.org | http://www.unmaintained-free-software.org
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-- linuxbios mailing list [email protected] http://www.openbios.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
