[LinuxBIOS] #33: Signed-off-by in trac is meaningless

[Uwe Hermann]

Hi,

On Sun, Nov 05, 2006 at 10:32:59PM +0100, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>  > Signed-off-by: and Acked-by: always corresponds to the latest  
> added patch, unless otherwise noted. Since each patch and each  
> comment has a timestamp, everything is clear, right?
> 
> So two patches by Uwe on a ticket with 3 comments -- yeah sure
> we can handle that.  Now how about a ticket with 12 proposed
> patches by 4 people, each fixing part of the problem, some superseded
> by newer patches; and all of that intermingled with some odd 100
> comments?  Can you still align that so that you clearly see or supposed
> "paper" track of origin of the code?

Where appropriate different issues should be "outsourced" to different
tickets. Yes, there will probably be some tickets with a huge number of
comments and patches. But that should be an exception.


> Maybe this is all just a symptom of a greater problem: patches should
> always be presented with a proposed check-in comment, and the
> signed-off-by should be part of that comment.

Yes, definately. I tried to do this for my last few patches already. It
should be documented correctly in the development guidelines, though
(those need some updates currently).


Uwe.
-- 
http://www.hermann-uwe.de  | http://www.holsham-traders.de
http://www.crazy-hacks.org | http://www.unmaintained-free-software.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://www.coreboot.org/pipermail/coreboot/attachments/20061105/a1b51581/attachment.sig>