[OE-core] [PATCH 00/21][RFC v3] systemd Integration

[Samuel Stirtzel]

2013/1/8 Radu Moisan <radu.moisan at intel.com>:
>
> On 01/08/2013 04:57 PM, Burton, Ross wrote:
>>
>> On 8 January 2013 15:01, Radu Moisan <radu.moisan at intel.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I am pretty sure that I added a 'Signed-off-by:' field to my patch but
>>> it is missing in the commit.  Other patches don't have the signed-off-by
>>> of the original author neither.
>>>
>>> Was this removal done on purpose?
>>>
>>>
>>> I had to port the patch manually so I guess it got lost then. Do we want
>>> to
>>> have Sign-off-by from author as well?
>>
>> By the time the patches land in oe-core there'll have been a lot of
>> rebasing and merging as I don't intend to see a series that contains
>> fixes in oe-core.  We should ensure that everyone who contributed to
>> meta-oe gets a credit in the series.
>>
> No question about that, the question was whether to add Sign-off-by from the
> author itself. I know that we are doing it like that right now, but I don't
> understand it's reasoning. Being the author of a patch what would be the
> point in adding a Sign-off-by with the same name? I can agree either way, no
> question about that, just want it to get it clear why we do it like we do
> it.
>
> Radu

This is part of the Linux Kernel patch workflow:

"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."


see: http://kerneltrap.org/files/Jeremy/DCO.txt


--
Regards
Samuel