Re: Streamlining Developer's Certificate of Origin, Signed-off-by tag

[Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>]

On Tue, 20 Nov 2012 12:59:40 -0800
"Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@do-not-panic.com> wrote:

> So it turns out everyone and their mother's attorneys love the
> Signed-off-by tag and its definition as explained on the Linux kernel
> under the Developer's Certificate of Origin. Its to the extent other
> projects have picked it up and started documenting their own
> documentation for submitting patches to embrace the same definition,
> some without knowing what they were doing, some knowingly and
> rightfully doing so. I think it'd be good to see more embracement of
> the tag but to help do this it occurs to me perhaps it'd be good to
> treat  the 'Developer's Certificate of Origin' as a standalone
> document that we can reference independently, and then have the kernel
> itself refer to it. That is, provide a unified easy way to refer to
> the practice for requiring the SOB tag and what it means.
> 
> Thoughts?

Nobody is stopping you putting a copy on a web site.