Re: [libvirt] [PATCH] HACKING: Introduce basic Signed-off-by politic
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 02:12:07PM +0200, Michal Privoznik wrote:
With the rising number of signed-off patches appearing on the list,
we should have policy what signed-off means, and advice (enforce?)
contributors to use it.
Signed-off-by: Michal Privoznik <mprivozn(a)redhat.com>
---
HACKING | 8 ++++++--
docs/hacking.html.in | 12 ++++++++----
2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/HACKING b/HACKING
index f9f8381..e54e584 100644
--- a/HACKING
+++ b/HACKING
@@ -73,8 +73,12 @@ commit introduced the problem, mentioning that is useful. If the
patch
resolves a bugzilla report, mentioning the URL of the bug number is useful;
but also summarize the issue rather than making all readers follow the link.
You can use 'git shortlog -30' to get an idea of typical summary lines.
-Libvirt does not currently attach any meaning to Signed-off-by: lines, so it
-is up to you if you want to include or omit them in the commit message.
+Moreover, you should sign off your patches, meaning you are the original
+author(s) of them and you have right to submit them under the open source
+license indicated in the file. To add the "Signed-off-by:" line to the commit
+message automatically, you can tweak the git configuration:
+
+ git config format.signoff true
I think if we're going todo this, we should be a bit more verbose. IOW,
I'd suggest right near the start of the hacking file we basically copy
the kernel's text on this matter
[quote]
To improve tracking of who did what, especially with patches that can
percolate to their final resting place in the kernel through several
layers of maintainers, we've introduced a "sign-off" procedure on
patches that are being emailed around.
The sign-off is a simple line at the end of the explanation for the
patch, which certifies that you wrote it or otherwise have the right to
pass it on as an open-source patch. The rules are pretty simple: if you
can certify the below:
Developer's Certificate of Origin 1.1
By making a contribution to this project, I certify that:
(a) The contribution was created in whole or in part by me and I
have the right to submit it under the open source license
indicated in the file; or
(b) The contribution is based upon previous work that, to the best
of my knowledge, is covered under an appropriate open source
license and I have the right under that license to submit that
work with modifications, whether created in whole or in part
by me, under the same open source license (unless I am
permitted to submit under a different license), as indicated
in the file; or
(c) The contribution was provided directly to me by some other
person who certified (a), (b) or (c) and I have not modified
it.
(d) I understand and agree that this project and the contribution
are public and that a record of the contribution (including all
personal information I submit with it, including my sign-off) is
maintained indefinitely and may be redistributed consistent with
this project or the open source license(s) involved.
then you just add a line saying
Signed-off-by: Random J Developer <random(a)developer.example.org>
using your real name (sorry, no pseudonyms or anonymous contributions.)
[/quote]
The kernel's docs also describe use of Acked-by, Tested-By and
many other annotations, if we want to really take this approach
fully.
Regards,
Daniel
--
|: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|