From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264535AbUEYDtv (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 May 2004 23:49:51 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264541AbUEYDtv (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 May 2004 23:49:51 -0400 Received: from waste.org ([209.173.204.2]:18320 "EHLO waste.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264535AbUEYDtt (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 May 2004 23:49:49 -0400 Date: Mon, 24 May 2004 22:49:20 -0500 From: Matt Mackall To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Thomas Gleixner , Andi Kleen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFD] Explicitly documenting patch submission Message-ID: <20040525034920.GY5414@waste.org> References: <1YUY7-6fF-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <200405242250.38442.tglx@linutronix.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, May 24, 2004 at 02:05:40PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Mon, 24 May 2004, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > > What I'm missing in this discussion is a clear distinction between patches and > > contributions. > > Well, I'm not sure such a clear distinction exists. Actually, there is a question as to how to sign off on something that eventually gets rolled into something larger? Simply collect all the signatories? Andrew aggregates patches on a fairly regular basis. How about stuff that gets merged from the CVS trees of public projects? I think we need a way to say "this came from an aggregate external source" for patches that aren't simply passed along one by one. Perhaps something like: Signed-off-by: J Random hacker from http://baz.sourceforge.net > Any process that doesn't allow for common sense is just broken, and > clearly from a _legal_ standpoint it doesn't matter if we track who fixed > out (atrocious) spelling errors. "our" -- Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.