From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga11.intel.com (mga11.intel.com [192.55.52.93]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E8D573CBD for ; Fri, 11 Sep 2015 07:13:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from orsmga003.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.27]) by fmsmga102.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 11 Sep 2015 00:13:38 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.17,510,1437462000"; d="scan'208";a="642787332" Received: from linux.intel.com ([10.23.219.25]) by orsmga003.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 11 Sep 2015 00:13:38 -0700 Received: by linux.intel.com (Postfix, from userid 48) id 511896A4087; Fri, 11 Sep 2015 00:12:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 10.252.58.194 (SquirrelMail authenticated user alexander.kanavin) by linux.intel.com with HTTP; Fri, 11 Sep 2015 10:12:46 +0300 (EEST) Message-ID: <62691.10.252.58.194.1441955566.squirrel@linux.intel.com> In-Reply-To: References: <1441909087-3860-1-git-send-email-alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2015 10:12:46 +0300 (EEST) From: alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com To: "Burton, Ross" User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.8-5.el4.centos.8 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Importance: Normal Cc: OE-core Subject: Re: [PATCH] webkitgtk: add a new recipe for latest upstream version X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2015 07:13:39 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > On 10 September 2015 at 19:18, Alexander Kanavin < > alexander.kanavin@linux.intel.com> wrote: > >> +Upstream-status: Backport [should appear in 2.10, >> http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/184856] >> > > Capital S in Status, and missing a signed-off-by (your name in the patch > header doesn't count). I've made these changes locally, don't bother > sending a revised edition. Wait a moment, why do we need a second signed-off-by there? The commit that adds the custom patch already has my signed-off-by, so it is redundant to repeat it I think. Alex