On Friday 10 July 2026 at 09:27:39 +0200, Yoann Congal wrote: > On Thu Jul 9, 2026 at 9:33 PM CEST, Alex Kiernan wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 9, 2026 at 8:07 PM Mike Crowe via lists.openembedded.org > > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I wasn't aware that I was expected to add one to the patch itself for a > >> backport. > >> > >> https://docs.yoctoproject.org/scarthgap/contributor-guide/recipe-style-guide.html > >> doesn't seem to say that a SoB should be added to the patch. It does say: > >> > >> | Of course, if another person later takes care of submitting this patch > >> | upstream, the status should be changed to Submitted [where], and an > >> | additional Signed-off-by: line should be added to the patch by the person > >> | claiming responsibility for upstreaming. > >> > >> which sort of implies that a SoB should be added for original patches that > >> are suitable for upstreaming but this patch is a backport which originated > >> upstream (without a SoB) which isn't the same thing. > >> > >> Adding a SoB to an unmodified upstream backport patch feels like > >> appropriation on my part, but I can do so if that's the policy.
> > You're certifying that the patch you're submitting is appropriately > > licensed; it says nothing about who authored it. > I agree with Alex: As the one requesting the backport, you are the one > signing-off on this particular operation. The original author had > nothing to do with that. I thought that I did that with the signed-off-by in the openembedded-core commit message. > I created a bug to request clarification in the doc on this point: > 16356 – Clarify trailers usage (Signed-off-by, ...) in imported patches > https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16356 Thanks. It feels like this needs an equivalent of oe.qa.check_upstream_status(). Such a check would currently fail since there are lots of existing patches that lack signed-off-bys and adding them would be significant work because each one would need to be manually checked. :( I suppose the check could also allow "Not-signed-off-by: <[email protected]>" or similar as a workaround for existing patches with a plan to eventually remove it as the patches are updated. v2 sent with signed-off-by in the patch. Thanks. Mike.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#240622): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/240622 Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/120033783/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
