<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 11 September 2015 at 08:12, <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com" target="_blank">alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div id=":1lz" class="a3s" style="overflow:hidden">Wait a moment, why do we need a second signed-off-by there? The commit<br>
that adds the custom patch already has my signed-off-by, so it is<br>
redundant to repeat it I think.<br></div></blockquote></div><br>Because the patch and the commit are not always tied together - if the patch gets copied for another recipe then there's no way to find out who added it, and VCS migrations complicate chasing history. It's not uncommon to be chasing down who created a patch to get additional context some seven years after it was created, which at this point in time means traversing two repos and three VCS migrations. I know this happens because I've spent 30 minutes chasing a crazy patch back to monotone commits in oe-classic only to find that I created it back in 2008...</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">Another real example: python3 has some setuptool patches which were added by Khem. From the Signed-off we can see that the patch was actually created by Richard and simply copied from the python2 recipes.</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">Ross</div></div>