linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: Signed-off-by missing for commit in the gfs2 tree

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

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 12 Dec 2018 10:46:05 -0500
From:   Konstantin Ryabitsev <konstantin@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Andreas Grünbacher 
        <andreas.gruenbacher@...il.com>
Cc:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@...hat.com>,
        Bob Peterson <rpeterso@...hat.com>,
        Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andreas Gruenbacher <agruenba@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Signed-off-by missing for commit in the gfs2 tree

On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 09:47:43PM +0100, Andreas Grünbacher wrote:
> > Now, after the rebase:
> >
> > Commits
> >
> >   187e4dad3f55 ("gfs2: Remove vestigial bd_ops")
> >
> > is missing a Signed-off-by from its committer.
> 
> Yep, I've not asked for a way to get the server to reject or warn
> about such pushes without a reason.

We don't run checks on push that involve iterating through commits,
because most of the pushes we receive are merges and rejecting on a
commit somewhere deep in an octopus merge would just result in angry
maintainers.

Best,
-K