From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9D1FC43458 for ; Fri, 10 Jul 2026 09:07:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from deneb.mcrowe.com (deneb.mcrowe.com [88.97.37.36]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.msgproc02-g2.8758.1783674465438791646 for ; Fri, 10 Jul 2026 02:07:45 -0700 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=pass header.i=@mcrowe.com header.s=20260328 header.b=iJ4nMUIp; spf=pass (domain: mcrowe.com, ip: 88.97.37.36, mailfrom: mac@mcrowe.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mcrowe.com; s=20260328; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:MIME-Version :References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=xOnL47sBYhHAbf2s2cSOASDB1XAISseXkxaAbmSwbmw=; b=iJ4nMUIpUfnNpw2KwaVIfraqr7 mBcLHkzVtWsJEN/RQ1GvsgNn6yX0BQ21Qz4yu86omitZzVid5UWQRQaQnDAf2W6lN5xoQGMSWKgAU gSZgB8DVrY5TgSVNLLHaLBxcdOkg60xQhReQe7hDEEjBmHh+z3YRNykIxJ4gsZjf4dpI1KOv7j4l2 Q1ZwlugySkCRKz3ogLszGUv1VryXgHJVfJI5JCHuLFKBqzZMsmyx6w1FVPgEUGKh+LY9LkvUJOa+h iInPSbm+xK23h6ycCokIRHSAJPhsBb+vjwV8EZAlzvsgkYfZ/Kd+7yqflWr76gvnj/Vn50cobwEIw YnrBwPtg==; Received: from mac by deneb.mcrowe.com with local (Exim 4.98.2) (envelope-from ) id 1wi7Cw-00000002XqU-33Ln; Fri, 10 Jul 2026 10:07:42 +0100 Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2026 10:07:42 +0100 From: Mike Crowe To: Yoann Congal , Alex Kiernan Cc: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [OE-core] [scarthgap][PATCH] dropbear: Disable DSS correctly Message-ID: References: <20260629165056.2489582-1-mac@mcrowe.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: List-Id: X-Webhook-Received: from 45-33-107-173.ip.linodeusercontent.com [45.33.107.173] by aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org with HTTPS for ; Fri, 10 Jul 2026 09:07:54 -0000 X-Groupsio-URL: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/240622 On Friday 10 July 2026 at 09:27:39 +0200, Yoann Congal wrote: > On Thu Jul 9, 2026 at 9:33 PM CEST, Alex Kiernan wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 9, 2026 at 8:07 PM Mike Crowe via lists.openembedded.org > > wrote: > >> I wasn't aware that I was expected to add one to the patch itself for a > >> backport. > >> > >> https://docs.yoctoproject.org/scarthgap/contributor-guide/recipe-style-guide.html > >> doesn't seem to say that a SoB should be added to the patch. It does say: > >> > >> | Of course, if another person later takes care of submitting this patch > >> | upstream, the status should be changed to Submitted [where], and an > >> | additional Signed-off-by: line should be added to the patch by the person > >> | claiming responsibility for upstreaming. > >> > >> which sort of implies that a SoB should be added for original patches that > >> are suitable for upstreaming but this patch is a backport which originated > >> upstream (without a SoB) which isn't the same thing. > >> > >> Adding a SoB to an unmodified upstream backport patch feels like > >> appropriation on my part, but I can do so if that's the policy. > > You're certifying that the patch you're submitting is appropriately > > licensed; it says nothing about who authored it. > I agree with Alex: As the one requesting the backport, you are the one > signing-off on this particular operation. The original author had > nothing to do with that. I thought that I did that with the signed-off-by in the openembedded-core commit message. > I created a bug to request clarification in the doc on this point: > 16356 – Clarify trailers usage (Signed-off-by, ...) in imported patches > https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16356 Thanks. It feels like this needs an equivalent of oe.qa.check_upstream_status(). Such a check would currently fail since there are lots of existing patches that lack signed-off-bys and adding them would be significant work because each one would need to be manually checked. :( I suppose the check could also allow "Not-signed-off-by: " or similar as a workaround for existing patches with a plan to eventually remove it as the patches are updated. v2 sent with signed-off-by in the patch. Thanks. Mike.