From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] git-am: support any number of signatures Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 06:09:03 +0300 Message-ID: <20140618030903.GA19593@redhat.com> References: <1402589505-27632-1-git-send-email-mst@redhat.com> <20140613080036.GA2117@redhat.com> <20140615102736.GA11798@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Christian Couder To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Jun 18 05:09:46 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Wx6Ft-000894-ME for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 18 Jun 2014 05:09:46 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932390AbaFRDJm (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Jun 2014 23:09:42 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:30926 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751058AbaFRDJl (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Jun 2014 23:09:41 -0400 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s5I38ai1025191 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 17 Jun 2014 23:08:37 -0400 Received: from redhat.com (ovpn-116-25.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.25]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with SMTP id s5I38Yx3016816; Tue, 17 Jun 2014 23:08:35 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.68 on 10.5.11.23 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 11:06:20AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > "Michael S. Tsirkin" writes: > > > Now A wants to sign this patch. > > > > I think there are two reasonable ways to behave: > > 1. What you describe above: > > A > > B > > A > > That is the only sensible thing to do for Signed-off-by footers. OK, after looking into this for a while, I realize this is a special property of the Signed-off-by footer. For now I think it's reasonable to just avoid de-duplicating other footers if any. Agree? To have it apply to other footers, will have to implement ^[A-Z]*-by: logic that I have implemented for sendemail, in am as well. I'll get back to that, but I think it's separate from this feature. -- MST