[U-Boot] [GIT PULL] Pull request: u-boot-staging

Graeme Russ
2011-11-24T07:02:29Z

On Nov 24, 2011 5:48 PM, "Igor Grinberg" <grinberg@compulab.co.il> wrote:
>
> On 11/23/11 22:12, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> > Dear Stefano Babic,
> >
> > In message <4ECD25EA.1020508@denx.de> you wrote:
> >>
> >>>> | (c) The contribution was provided directly to me by some
other
> >>>> | person who certified (a), (b) or (c) and I have not
modified
> >>>> | it.
> > ...
> >>>> (a) and (b) don't apply here, and (d) is not relevant in this
context.
> >>>> So the question is if (c) applies, or not.
> >>>
> >>> Well, I think yes (c) applies here and if you look into the Linux
> >>> git log, you will see that all patches applied by maintainers are
> >>> also signed by them.
> >>
> >> Reading (c), I can interprete as Igor does...
> >
> > I _can_ interpret that so as well, but does it make sense?
> >
> > By that logic _all_ commits in the Linux kernel must have the SoB of
> > Linus Torvalds. Do they?
>
> No they should not.
> As for my understanding, the delivery path ends with the repository
> from which the pull process starts.
> That is, the repository that has the *commit id* first set
> and then it is not changed, because pull requests keep the
> history intact. This is the reason, why Linus Torvalds do not
> sign each patch pulled from others with git pull.
>

Isn't the committer field enough?

And what difference does it really make anyway?

Regards,

Graeme