Re: [coreboot] r2 - trunk/openvsa/sysmgr

[Peter Stuge]

On Sat, Feb 09, 2008 at 09:55:32PM +0100, [e-mail] wrote:
> Author: kilgour
> Date: 2008-02-09 21:55:31 +0100 (Sat, 09 Feb 2008)
> New Revision: 2
>
> Removed:
>    trunk/openvsa/sysmgr/delme
>    trunk/openvsa/sysmgr/delme.c
> Log:
> remove files accidentally added to SVN

Should the Signed-off-by: procedure be used also for the openvsa repo?

//Peter

r2 - trunk/openvsa/sysmgr

[ron minnich]

On Feb 9, 2008 9:23 PM, Peter Stuge  wrote:
> Should the Signed-off-by: procedure be used also for the openvsa repo?

Once it settles in for sure, but for now, it's pretty much one guy.

ron

r2 - trunk/openvsa/sysmgr

[Chris Kilgour]

Peter Stuge wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 09, 2008 at 09:55:32PM +0100, [e-mail] wrote:
> > Author: kilgour
> > Date: 2008-02-09 21:55:31 +0100 (Sat, 09 Feb 2008)
> > New Revision: 2
> >
> > Removed:
> >    trunk/openvsa/sysmgr/delme
> >    trunk/openvsa/sysmgr/delme.c
> > Log:
> > remove files accidentally added to SVN
>
> Should the Signed-off-by: procedure be used also for the openvsa repo?

In general I would agree, but in this case I was removing junk files of
my own that I had let slip into my tarball that was used to seed the
openvsa SVN tree.  Since it was removal-only, I felt it was not a
"contribution" but rather a "retraction" and therefore required no
sign-off in that regard.

Outside of this special case, I fully expect the sign-off/ack procedures
will be followed.

If my decision was bad form, then I humbly ask forgiveness :-)

Chris.

r2 - trunk/openvsa/sysmgr

[Peter Stuge]

On Sat, Feb 09, 2008 at 10:58:51PM -0800, Chris Kilgour wrote:
> If my decision was bad form, then I humbly ask forgiveness :-)

Don't worry! All is good. :)

//Peter

r2 - trunk/openvsa/sysmgr

[Uwe Hermann]

On Sat, Feb 09, 2008 at 10:58:51PM -0800, Chris Kilgour wrote:
> > Should the Signed-off-by: procedure be used also for the openvsa repo?
>
> In general I would agree, but in this case I was removing junk files of
> my own that I had let slip into my tarball that was used to seed the
> openvsa SVN tree.  Since it was removal-only, I felt it was not a
> "contribution" but rather a "retraction" and therefore required no
> sign-off in that regard.
>
> Outside of this special case, I fully expect the sign-off/ack procedures
> will be followed.

Agreed, I think we should just use the sign-off procedure on _all_ our
repositories. Trivial fixes etc. can always be self-ACKed a la

Signed-off-by: Uwe Hermann 
Acked-by: Uwe Hermann

if that's needed, but even in that case the sign-offs themselves are
useful (IMO) to keep a consistent "trail" of all contributions, for
easy grepping in 'svn log' output etc. etc.

Can we add the usual svn hook for the openvsa repo (as well as all other
repos which don't have it yet)?

Thanks, Uwe.