[linux-elitists] Update on Getting Shlomi Fish's Emails Unbanned from vger.kernel.org (for submitting a kernel patch and getting help with git on the Better-SCM site)

Karsten M. Self karsten at linuxmafia.com
Fri Mar 30 11:26:21 PDT 2012

on Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 09:37:26AM -0700, Greg KH (greg at kroah.com) wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 09:21:26AM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> > on Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 08:16:52AM -0700, Greg KH (greg at kroah.com) wrote:
> > > On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 07:33:52AM -0700, Marc MERLIN wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 12:36:45PM +0300, Shlomi Fish wrote:
> > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > 
> > > > > in a previous thread on this list:
> > > > 
> > > > Dear I still don't know who your name is, and I don't take people who Email
> > > > with silly aliases seriously.
> > > 
> > > Dammit Marc, you just blew it!  That was going to be the next hurdle we
> > > threw up in getting those patches accepted into the kernel tree as the
> > > kernel developers are not allowed to accept contributions from people
> > > not using their legal name.
> > 
> > I take it this is a side-effect of the upcoming merger of The Linux
> > Foundation and Google+.
> > 
> > ;-)
> I know you are just joking here, but no, we have had this policy in
> place for many many years now, it is not something new at all.  See the
> file, Documentation/SubmittingPatches in the Linux kernel source tree
> for details (the Signed-off-by: portion is the section that is
> relevant.)
> And as the lawyers constantly remind me, copyright is not a laughing
> matter :(

Indeed.  And I'd read of that, wasn't thinking of it when I wrote my
quip though.

Is it required that the person coding be the person signing off?

To trot out an old favorite model, Lawrence Lessig's _Code And Other
Laws of Cyberspace_ has the exampel of the Yale Wall.  A physical, free
speech posting area which had one requirement:  posts had to be signed.

By someone.

Not necessarily the author.

This led to the emergent practice of anonymous messages being posted,
and, in some instances, being signed by a third party (prior to whatever
periodic unsigned note culling process was in place).  So:  "signed but
not written by X".

Is there any analog in the Linux kernel development process?  Debian has
a few discussions of freedoms, among them the desert island and
dissident tests.  These are for judging licenses, not code acceptence
practices, but there's a relationship between the two.  While a
kernel-hacking Crusoe might care for noteriety, the dissident might not:



Karsten M. Self <karsten at linuxmafia.com>        http://linuxmafia.com/~karsten
 What part of "gestalt" don't you understand?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://zgp.org/pipermail/linux-elitists/attachments/20120330/181367ef/attachment.pgp>

More information about the linux-elitists mailing list