From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-wm1-f53.google.com (mail-wm1-f53.google.com [209.85.128.53]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6EC7A135A53 for ; Wed, 14 May 2025 16:46:40 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.128.53 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1747241202; cv=none; b=oPiOpF93jIEMUUc5pq3VfEbZ7jxqOOluG35aG2tzDe0VHdZ5+7reLYewHNcsD4GeOkfCgY64AncwhewSwz81qJs4HawZi9iMSYBeD5x5kzFzy1orUiF/g/U/e+QUV3jGn9sYRVUhzG5ujo+u+qefHkwT5ZcjlTCLkddIhUgN6aw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1747241202; c=relaxed/simple; bh=vM9DI0FXUuVxgj5IuoirSNp8X6nVxvKamQ4hnTYhtZ0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=QmRI8Vpek3rx6g8kFiK/hBXObijQrQFiBJhqnEI7RACt6g+gJ9icEeUipDSDS01t0Eq0ukXOm2XF32cPINz3/ParjcDBckWFTPEW+PvQXqOM9GiKBIyqoi0PTsEY9Xz3mC3ZZy0mMyAFEm1IEhYYdjBLjC/NDGG8ysv/5nnV8nA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=chrisdown.name; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=chrisdown.name; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=chrisdown.name header.i=@chrisdown.name header.b=MjoEBvKJ; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.128.53 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=chrisdown.name Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=chrisdown.name Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=chrisdown.name header.i=@chrisdown.name header.b="MjoEBvKJ" Received: by mail-wm1-f53.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-442ccf0e1b3so239345e9.3 for ; Wed, 14 May 2025 09:46:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=chrisdown.name; s=google; t=1747241199; x=1747845999; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=user-agent:in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references :message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=CpHTCY4tJOyu30iP4chLIjfGHlYrKlSNTzkzcA7MSKQ=; b=MjoEBvKJv9KerZSxFuB4iwh7xboloIkIo0KSZWxwZo4XmXzYDc7sJzSqvAYskXB7d5 /YjDkh6u9OXxXi5hkzYZkvuYha/6wnrlBxnOw5womIN8oXDJbzLClyGeAmhs5nF5gkqD WFMtjs4BxKqwbkScwbbhEdmJb83OeaYkNUdl8= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1747241199; x=1747845999; h=user-agent:in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references :message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=CpHTCY4tJOyu30iP4chLIjfGHlYrKlSNTzkzcA7MSKQ=; b=CtkpIJIR06RTYXIhKC95u9LQO5kciNuyrPsmzWbpYRNAaX9+UCMHaV+cZsqTCwrX3b 1ZP7ozUgPcJsCPz2IjfzmibIf5Mkg/k9VXKQ2IX1wKXrvSj78gXlHPRDdUmAIKzGns9r u5sjr6vHtAUl25xMcQsn+Aqys+szqu6uq4toz1mScOBij+ttDaDXSX0Sie9meJtf1B5b GHARiKmEvREiJvCjxyUPPUY1hGSczj2Nr/yPVrBpbFaCbqRGH40wdzpPWXXm8cq24O5p Xfn3MYJ4rNkk7zqMvxcn8nE7UVuJVL+cTL8Y7cYc57cuAtu8jeo0wJJ3tB+WUzL+il21 cWIg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yx084841lhvGPueCxLJpaDKfcyFbdOx22hBwY7q3JuAh+drY4vp wjwlrZGdzTJEsDJj3WD/ijTq8PVurU4kibeucKLNyvOBWYC2xMfV0kwbzO8Fo+0= X-Gm-Gg: ASbGnctO4s0KjY6pBxb5h8tvakJstYraAaCvs3Sd6VwB+4QW3VJYOIE3TikyiV1a+Qg 6ACUSi/JEQUy/2Jb68+2mJFmi/2JEDuX7ShR20y5H1c94gULvII/pEf96z6iaPX9O1av1wEFxdD lvWhRHBhAxZTbAd/q4en10jfenuNi1LWiepVAG+tLtFry/8ZqyZnHSM3gVdF0ruG8+G+ctGo08b fzg8fzNXlIV5gHjU62Omz5z3h/WR1R1Q1r2b0OmjwvMrP67wFOBN4hSE3zdUUXE5AauKz6Nozt3 pryjTW3xhCEUGy0lq8BqxhXHG8aEqM0vllXZDKQm7atdX/dW9dy96w== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFhu7fBoPZk0v4GksajuaF1KenqN+7kG12j7iO1HRevFvLpFz+1y9+Xncr9qnkbWDRabHC5Eg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:1c14:b0:43c:f895:cb4e with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-442f210f6f4mr43446985e9.17.1747241198502; Wed, 14 May 2025 09:46:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([2a01:4b00:8432:8600:46a3:bbff:fe27:9a9d]) by smtp.gmail.com with UTF8SMTPSA id 5b1f17b1804b1-442f3380544sm37612475e9.13.2025.05.14.09.46.37 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 14 May 2025 09:46:37 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 14 May 2025 17:46:37 +0100 From: Chris Down To: "D. Ben Knoble" Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Junio C Hamano , kernel-team@fb.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] commit: Add commit.signoff configuration option Message-ID: References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/2.2.14 (516568dc) (2025-02-20) [Code changes acked, thank you for the review :-)] D. Ben Knoble writes: >It would probably be nice to say why this makes sense in light of >previously-raised objections, too [1]. > >[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/git/xmqqo6x4p6z2.fsf@gitster.g/ I understand where people are coming from for sure, but I think the conversation has moved on beyond many of those points, right? For example, some of the objections are about format.signoff in 2006, but we merged that into the tree since 2009 in commit 1d1876e9300c ("Add configuration variable for sign-off to format-patch"). From those threads, the main arguments seem to be: - Signoff should be a conscious act - Adding it automatically might dilute its meaning - The potential for signoffs through inertia without proper intent However, I think these objections don't hold up well in light of a few things. First, the objections conflict with precedent from the now merged format.signoff. If we've already determined that configuring automatic signoffs in one context is acceptable (where that will then later become a commit anyway), it creates inconsistency to reject the same capability in another closely related context. Second, setting a configuration value _is_ a conscious act. When I enable commit.signoff=true in a repository, I'm making a deliberate, repository specific declaration that I have the rights to submit all work in this repository under the project's license. This is arguably even more meaningful than mechanically adding -s to individual commits, either without thought through muscle memory, or through a shell based, context agnostic alias as many users do now. In general, it feels like an inconsistency in semantics to have format.signoff available but not commit.signoff. From a user's perspective, we're just adding a signoff trailer to something that will eventually become an upstream commit. It doesn't really matter whether that's through a mailing list (format-patch), a pull request (commit), or otherwise. I'm certainly open to further discussion, of course, but the existing precedent seems to make a compelling case for this feature.