From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264939AbUEYQCV (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 May 2004 12:02:21 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264959AbUEYQCV (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 May 2004 12:02:21 -0400 Received: from mail.kssb.net ([198.248.45.1]:47292 "EHLO california.campus") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264939AbUEYQCQ (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 May 2004 12:02:16 -0400 Message-ID: <40B36E0B.3090605@kssb.net> Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 11:02:19 -0500 From: Bradley Hook User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6b) Gecko/20031205 Thunderbird/0.4 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Linux-Kernel Subject: Re: [RFD] Explicitly documenting patch submission References: <1085468812.2783.7.camel@laptop.fenrus.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 25 May 2004 16:02:17.0441 (UTC) FILETIME=[A70A1510:01C44271] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Steven Cole wrote: > > On May 25, 2004, at 1:06 AM, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > >> >> >>> explanation part of the patch. That sign-off would be just a single line >>> at the end (possibly after _other_ peoples sign-offs), saying: >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Random J Developer >> >> >> well this obviously needs to include that you signed off on the DCO and >> not some other random piece of paper, and it probably should include the >> DCO revision number you signed off on. >> Without the former the Signed-off-by: line is entirely empty afaics, >> without the later we're not future proof. >> >> > > How about something like: > > DCO 1.0 Signed-off-by: Random J Developer > > This new process being "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound > of cure" should retain the property of being lightweight and not > unduly burdensome. This change seems to fall into that category. > > Steven > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ > Why not design the DCO so that it assumes an author accepts the most recent published version unless specified. You could then shorten the line to: DCO-Sign-Off: Random J Developer And if they wanted to specify a version, use something like: DCO-Sign-Off: Random J Developer [DCO 1.0] You could also define the signoff line to use different delimiters for various types of information, to allow for all of these "custom" ideas that contributing companies may feel they "need". For example, say any text not enclosed by any delimiters is considered a name, anything in <> is an email, in [] is a DCO version, and {} allows for optional information. This would allow for stuff like Yarroll submitted while I was typing this email, for example: DCO-Sign-Off: La Monte H.P. Yarroll [DCO 1.0] {TS00062} Nothing other than name and email would be required, but they would be available for those that wish to use them. This would make it easy for scripts to sort out the info on this line. ~Brad