[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 15:29:07 PDT 2012


on Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 12:07:23PM -0700, Greg KH (greg at kroah.com) wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 11:26:21AM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> > Is it required that the person coding be the person signing off?
> 
> Did you read the Developer's Certificate of Origin (DCO) described in
> the file, Documentation/SubmittingPatches in the kernel source tree?
> That explains this question quite throughly I thought.  If not, please
> point out where it should be clarified.

Thanks for pointing that out.  And mind I'm giving hypotheticals, not
sure what's happening in practice.


It appears that section 13 of SubmittingPatches would correspond to the
Yale Wall model, though that's not clearly stated.  I don't know if it
should be, but text such as: 

    In (special|exceptional) cases, by request, submissions _MAY_ be 
    considered which are not tagged Signed-of-by, but are instead
    Acked-by a listed maintainer.

E.g.:  if you've got a bloody good reason, we'll consider your request,
but no promises, and don't the lawyerly types don't like us doing this.


In practice, Are patches ever accepted which are *only* Acked-By and not
Signed-off-by?  Would/have you done such a thing (acked someone's
unsigned-by-request) patch?


Thanks & peace.

-- 
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/20120330/8a1eba4f/attachment.pgp>


More information about the linux-elitists mailing list