Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o>
To: gentoo-project <gentoo-project@l.g.o>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] [RFC] GLEP 76: Copyright Policy [v4]
Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2018 19:28:29
Message-Id: CAGfcS_nPU4jPjGYxuGsr-vXjnM98czfE-Hi1c_4gX5+C_ZE2Sw@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-project] [RFC] GLEP 76: Copyright Policy [v4] by Andrew Savchenko
On Wed, Oct 3, 2018 at 3:16 PM Andrew Savchenko <bircoph@g.o> wrote:
> > Sign-off usually means "I have reviewed this commit and approve it". > This is how it works in the Linux kernel where one have to collect > sufficient number of sign-offs to pass commit in the main tree. An > attempt to give it another meaning like "I'm the author of this > commit" looks questionable. Of course DCO certification is fine as > well. >
In Linux kernel development signed-off-by has nothing to do with code reviews/approvals per se, and everything to do with the DCO. Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst Simply giving approval without certifying the DCO is done with the Acked-by tag. Anybody in the process of forwarding the patch up to Linux has to append a Signed-off-by, because they're signing the DCO for that patch. A maintainer who isn't forwarding the patch would use Acked-by, since they didn't touch the patch and thus could not have introduced copyrightable changes. -- Rich