Re: [RFD] Explicitly documenting patch submission

[Albert Cahalan <albert@users.sf.net>]

[this didn't have the right subject before, sorry]

Linus Torvalds writes:

> (Seriously, while nobody has actually complained about
> the suggested rules, I don't think anybody should feel
> compelled to do the sign-off before we've had more
> time to let people argue over it. People who feel 
> comfortable with the suggestion are obviously
> encouraged to start asap, though).

I had been hoping someone had just forged your email
address. :-/  You're not known for bureaucracy.

The wordy mix-case aspect is kind of annoying, and for
all that we don't get to differentiate actions.
I count:

1. came up with the design ideas
2. wrote the original patch
3. reviewed and passed on
4. modified
5. blindly passed on

Maybe "blindly passed on" needs nothing. So I'm
thinking, if we must bother with all this...

designed:
authored:
reviewed:
modified:

Add "pirated:" if you like, so that searching for
pirated code is easier than checking the evil bit.