| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-Id: <1344548903-23117-1-git-send-email-mcgrof@do-not-panic.com> Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2012 14:48:23 -0700 From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...not-panic.com> To: torvalds@...ux-foundation.org Cc: rdunlap@...otime.net, tytso@....edu, alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk, davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...not-panic.com> Subject: [PATCH v2] SubmittingPatches: clarify SOB tag usage when evolving submissions From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...not-panic.com> Initial large code submissions typically are not accepted on their first patch submission. The developers are typically given feedback and at times some developers may even submit changes to the original authors for integration into their second submission attempt. Developers wishing to contribute changes to the evolution of a second patch submission must supply their own Siged-off-by tag to the original authors and must submit their changes on a public mailing list or ensure that these submission are recorded somewhere publicly. To date a few of these type of contributors have expressed different preferences for whether or not their own SOB tag should be used for a second code submission. Lets keep things simple and only require the contributor's SOB tag if so desired explicitly. It is not technically required if there already is a public record of their contribution somewhere. Document this on Documentation/SubmittingPatches Signed-off-by: Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@...not-panic.com> --- This v2 has Singed/Signed typo fixes. Documentation/SubmittingPatches | 15 +++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+) diff --git a/Documentation/SubmittingPatches b/Documentation/SubmittingPatches index c379a2a..3154565 100644 --- a/Documentation/SubmittingPatches +++ b/Documentation/SubmittingPatches @@ -366,6 +366,21 @@ and protect the submitter from complaints. Note that under no circumstances can you change the author's identity (the From header), as it is the one which appears in the changelog. +If you are submitting a large change (for example a new driver) at times +you may be asked to make quite a lot of modifications prior to getting +your change accepted. At times you may even receive patches from developers +who not only wish to tell you what you should change to get your changes +upstream but actually send you patches. If those patches were made publicly +and they do contain a Signed-off-by tag you are not expected to provide +their own Signed-off-by tag on the second iteration of the patch so long +as there is a public record somewhere that can be used to show the +contributor had sent their changes with their own Signed-off-by tag. + +If you receive patches privately during development you may want to +ask for these patches to be re-posted publicly or you can also decide +to merge the patches as part of a separate historical git tree that +will remain online for historical archiving. + Special note to back-porters: It seems to be a common and useful practise to insert an indication of the origin of a patch at the top of the commit message (just after the subject line) to facilitate tracking. For instance, -- 1.7.10.4 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists