| 1 |
Dnia 24 października 2016 07:32:26 CEST, Daniel Campbell <zlg@g.o> napisał(a): |
| 2 |
>On 10/19/2016 02:10 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote: |
| 3 |
>>>>>>> On Wed, 19 Oct 2016, Kent Fredric wrote: |
| 4 |
>> |
| 5 |
>>> On Tue, 18 Oct 2016 21:45:05 -0500 |
| 6 |
>>> Matthew Thode <prometheanfire@g.o> wrote: |
| 7 |
>> |
| 8 |
>>>> Does pram allow you to pass options to git |
| 9 |
>>>> am (signedoffby for instance)? |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
>>> It doesn't presently allow arbitrary arguments, and it would |
| 12 |
>>> probably be wise to avoid need for such arguments and prefer |
| 13 |
>>> convention over configuration, given what this is. |
| 14 |
>> |
| 15 |
>>> --signoff is already a default: |
| 16 |
>> |
| 17 |
>>> |
| 18 |
>https://metacpan.org/source/MONSIEURP/Gentoo-App-Pram-0.003000/lib/Gentoo/App/Pram.pm#L71 |
| 19 |
>> |
| 20 |
>> Maybe I have missed something, but why would one use --signoff for |
| 21 |
>> a Gentoo commit? |
| 22 |
>> |
| 23 |
>> For Linux (the kernel), the meaning of the line is that the |
| 24 |
>> contributor certifies the DCO (Developer's Certificate of Origin) |
| 25 |
>[1]. |
| 26 |
>> As we don't have a Gentoo DCO, it is not at all clear to me what the |
| 27 |
>> meaning of a Signed-off-by: line would be in the context of the |
| 28 |
>gentoo |
| 29 |
>> tree. |
| 30 |
>> |
| 31 |
>> Even worse, I see commits having Signed-off-by: lines with obvious |
| 32 |
>> pseudonyms instead of a real name, which would be meaningless even if |
| 33 |
>> one would say that the Linux rules apply. (Also, we have the rule |
| 34 |
>that |
| 35 |
>> real names must be provided for all developers, with no exceptions to |
| 36 |
>> be made for people doing copyrightable work [2].) |
| 37 |
>> |
| 38 |
>> Ulrich |
| 39 |
>> |
| 40 |
>> [1] |
| 41 |
>http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/SubmittingPatches?id=dca22a63fd036c3ebb50212060eba0080f178126#n428 |
| 42 |
>> [2] |
| 43 |
>https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Recruiters#What_does_the_recruitment_process_involve.3F |
| 44 |
>> |
| 45 |
>The way I understood "signed off by" for Gentoo is "I am a developer |
| 46 |
>who |
| 47 |
>looked at the code and tested it, confirming it works on my system". If |
| 48 |
>an AT signs off, they are certifying that it passes their test muster. |
| 49 |
> |
| 50 |
>It's a more formal "looks good to me", and provides a point of |
| 51 |
>accountability if the commit _isn't_ up to par. |
| 52 |
|
| 53 |
How about Gentoo developers stopping to reuse things that have well-defined meaning for something completely different? |
| 54 |
|
| 55 |
|
| 56 |
-- |
| 57 |
Best regards, |
| 58 |
Michał Górny (by phone) |
Archives