Re: [REMINDER] Please signoff when committing other people's changes

On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 6:00 PM, Andre wrote: > James, > > There's no doubt the Sign-off-by is redundant (as GIT itself holds that > information, reason why GH is still able to show the information without > the sign-of-by stamp), however, I agree with your view around

Re: [REMINDER] Please signoff when committing other people's changes

James, There's no doubt the Sign-off-by is redundant (as GIT itself holds that information, reason why GH is still able to show the information without the sign-of-by stamp), however, I agree with your view around positive action and easy to refer as Bryan pointed. Joe, Thanks for the

Re: [REMINDER] Please signoff when committing other people's changes

I recommend the practice. Although the signoff may not be authoritative, it requires a positive action that suggests you purposefully merged the commit, as opposed to commits you might have accidentally merged and pushed. Thanks, James On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 7:49 AM, Joe Witt

Re: [REMINDER] Please signoff when committing other people's changes

"If this not the expected process, we should definitely update the Contributor Guide." I think it is fine to encourage it. It is not a requirement though. The signoff is not an apache thing. Committer privileges to push code to a given repo is an apache thing. We're an RTC community and the

Re: [REMINDER] Please signoff when committing other people's changes

Like Andre, I originally got the requirement for signoff from the Contributor Guide[1] when I started working on the project and later from this email thread[2]. If this not the expected process, we should definitely update the Contributor Guide. >From the Apache perspective the signoff confirms

Re: [REMINDER] Please signoff when committing other people's changes

For what it is worth this is definitely not a requirement and not something I knew anything of so I never do it. I think it is a perfectly fine idea and a good practice to follow so occasional reminders of its utility are fair game. That said, to Bryan's point I rely on the JIRA/issues history

Re: [REMINDER] Please signoff when committing other people's changes

I didn't realize it was required either, I usually only sign off (using the same thing Bryan Bende does) if the PR author couldn't merge it on their own (i.e. not a NiFi committer/PMC). Certainly I can start always signing off commits. Regards, Matt On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 8:35 AM, Oleg

Re: [REMINDER] Please signoff when committing other people's changes

Thanks Bryan. If ‘-s’ is only for showcasing the committer I don’t believe anyone would have any issues with it, but my concern at the moment is purely legal, so I am not sure who is the right person to answer that, but figured raising the concern is the least I can do. Cheers Oleg > On Mar

Re: [REMINDER] Please signoff when committing other people's changes

The sign-off is so we can easily see who the reviewer/merger was from the git history. We can always go back to the JIRA or PR and the reviewer/merger should have commented there, but its convenient to see it in the git history in my opinion. Personally, whenever merging someones contribution I

Re: [REMINDER] Please signoff when committing other people's changes

Andre Thanks for the reminder. I admit that I did not know that we require it in the Contributor Guide, so thanks for pointing it out. However, your email did prompt me to look at the purpose and origin of the ‘-s’ flag and led me to this thread on Stack Overflow -

[REMINDER] Please signoff when committing other people's changes

dev, May I remind you to ensure we follow the Contributor Guide and use: git commit --amend -s when merging commits from your peers? While git pretty-format can be used to reveal the committer, I am sure that all of us will agree that as an inclusive community we value both the pretty and ugly