From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30720C433E2 for ; Thu, 3 Sep 2020 13:43:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DA9372072A for ; Thu, 3 Sep 2020 13:43:55 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="gD6IhY+V" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org DA9372072A Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:47624 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kDpWt-0007jo-3p for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Thu, 03 Sep 2020 09:43:55 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:47062) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kDpWH-0006pq-1w for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 03 Sep 2020 09:43:17 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-1.mimecast.com ([205.139.110.61]:23010 helo=us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kDpWE-0000uv-TI for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 03 Sep 2020 09:43:16 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1599140593; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=2JjLeOhnrG+lsFCenhM45DwtDLHZzwBBDNh5TMsj4tY=; b=gD6IhY+VbL7IUB5liiMyMThI1XeJ3GrmsWSC0z2ujYVtUJTVBqkZYOnHDGMu2IdijCU3UL 7LIgJvow1JrJGunL3y1MAjktO/LrID9qoZMJxEMB7+MeUSdkYJGBCAR5OBCiWAND6bIYPw XHfkoHBa7o/y1goJ20zZHASyrek4GFw= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-240-mw90F5kEODuVHoDawTn2Bw-1; Thu, 03 Sep 2020 09:43:12 -0400 X-MC-Unique: mw90F5kEODuVHoDawTn2Bw-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3690B801AEA; Thu, 3 Sep 2020 13:43:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from linux.fritz.box (ovpn-114-183.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.114.183]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E75B978B38; Thu, 3 Sep 2020 13:43:09 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2020 15:43:08 +0200 From: Kevin Wolf To: Fabian =?iso-8859-1?Q?Gr=FCnbichler?= Subject: Re: [RFC qemu 0/6] mirror: implement incremental and bitmap modes Message-ID: <20200903134308.GE8835@linux.fritz.box> References: <20200218100740.2228521-1-f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com> <1599127031.9uxdp5h9o2.astroid@nora.none> <20200903123850.GB8835@linux.fritz.box> <20200903132343.GD8835@linux.fritz.box> <1599140071.n44h532eeu.astroid@nora.none> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1599140071.n44h532eeu.astroid@nora.none> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.15 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=kwolf@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0.001 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Disposition: inline Received-SPF: pass client-ip=205.139.110.61; envelope-from=kwolf@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/09/03 01:28:33 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, John Snow , Markus Armbruster , qemu-block@nongnu.org, Max Reitz Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" Am 03.09.2020 um 15:36 hat Fabian Grünbichler geschrieben: > On September 3, 2020 3:23 pm, Kevin Wolf wrote: > > Am 03.09.2020 um 14:57 hat Max Reitz geschrieben: > >> On 03.09.20 14:38, Kevin Wolf wrote: > >> > Am 03.09.2020 um 13:04 hat Max Reitz geschrieben: > >> >> On 03.09.20 12:13, Fabian Grünbichler wrote: > >> >>> On August 21, 2020 3:03 pm, Max Reitz wrote: > >> >>>> On 18.02.20 11:07, Fabian Grünbichler wrote: > >> >>> I am not sure how > >> >>> the S-O-B by John is supposed to enter the mix - should I just include > >> >>> it in the squashed patch (which would be partly authored, but > >> >>> not-yet-signed-off by him otherwise?)? > >> >> > >> >> I’m not too sure on the proceedings, actually. I think it should be > >> >> fine if you put his S-o-b there, as long as your patch is somehow based > >> >> on a patch that he sent earlier with his S-o-b underneath. But I’m not > >> >> sure. > >> > > >> > Signed-off-by means that John certifies the DCO for the patch (at least > >> > the original version that you possibly modified), so you cannot just add > >> > it without asking him. > >> > >> But what if you take a patch from someone and heavily modify it – > >> wouldn’t you keep the original S-o-b and explain the modifications in > >> the commit message? > > > > Ah, if that patch already had a S-o-b, then yes. You keep it not only to > > show who touched the patch, but also because your own S-o-b depends on > > the one from the original author (you only have the rights to contribute > > it because the original author had them and could pass them on to you). > > > > I thought it was based on a patch that came without S-o-b. > > it is (taken from John's git, with his approval, and implicit admission > that S-O-B is just missing because it was a WIP branch/tree that I > started from). that was also the reason why I kept that patch unmodified > and sent my modifications as patches on-top, to make it easier for John > to verify that that one patch is his original WIP one and add this > missing S-O-B ;) Yeah, then John should just reply to the patch and add the S-o-b. Complications like this are why I always use 'git commit -s' and have it already in my development branches rather than only adding it when preparing the patch emails to send. Kevin