On 03/19/2015 01:51 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
On Thu, 2015-03-19 at 13:47 -0700, York Sun wrote:
On 03/19/2015 01:37 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
On Thu, 2015-03-19 at 13:27 -0700, York Sun wrote:
On 03/19/2015 01:06 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
On Thu, 2015-03-19 at 13:02 -0700, York Sun wrote:
On 03/19/2015 12:58 PM, Scott Wood wrote: > On Thu, 2015-03-19 at 12:54 -0700, York Sun wrote: >> >> On 03/19/2015 12:52 PM, Scott Wood wrote: >>> On Thu, 2015-03-19 at 18:14 +0000, Mark Rutland wrote: >>>> On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 04:45:48PM +0000, York Sun wrote: >>>>> Signed-off-by: Scott Wood scottwood@freescale.com >>> >>> York, where's your signoff since you're the one submitting the patch? >> >> I am sending many patches in this set. Since I didn't contribute to this patch, >> I didn't add my signed-off-by. > > That's not what signed-off-by means. I realize (though never understood > why) the U-Boot project differs from Linux rules in terms of whether > custodians are expected to sign off patches when applying, but does that > extend to submitting patches by e-mail as well? >
I don't have the answer myself. I haven't added any of my signed-off-by for the patches I squashed/tested/sent. For small patch set, I would request the original author to send each patch. For large set with dependency, I send patch on behalf of the authors. I don't want to take credit for the patch I didn't contribute the change. I test all of them though.
The From: line is for giving credit. Signed-off-by shows the path the patch took. Plus, leaving your name off puts all the blame on the author, when they weren't the ones who decided the patch was ready to submit. :-)
When multiple patches are squashed, I put authors' name in signed-off-by. For this reason, I think adding my signoff will be confusing.
If there are multiple authors you can give credit with an explicit statement in the changelog.
But I agree with you that I should have my name somewhere for the patches I sent. Doesn't the email "from" qualify?
The email "from" doesn't go in the git history.
Changelog doesn't goes to git history either.
Yes, it does. I'm not talking about the comments below the --- that are sometimes used to give history of the patch itself or other transient info. The stuff above the --- is the git changelog.
Can you show me some examples so I can follow?
Back to this patch, it is not critical for u-boot to operate. Do you want to drop this patch?
York