[LinuxBIOS] r2582 - in trunk/LinuxBIOSv2/src/superio: . fintek fintek/f71805f

Uwe Hermann uwe at hermann-uwe.de
Wed Apr 11 23:15:50 CEST 2007


On Wed, Apr 11, 2007 at 10:38:08PM +0200, Stefan Reinauer wrote:
> * Uwe Hermann <uwe at hermann-uwe.de> [070411 22:20]:
> > On Thu, Apr 05, 2007 at 09:52:57PM +0200, Peter Stuge wrote:
> > I don't think we had a clear resolution when we last discussed this.
> > 
> > IMHO this procedure is ok:
> > 
> >  - Only add a Signed-off-by if you modified the code. If you're just
> >    committing someone else's code unmodified, you don't sign-off (but the
> >    patch creator must have signed-off of course; patches without sign-offs
> >    must never be committed).
> > 
> >  - Any code which gets committed must have at least one Signed-off-by
> >    _and_ at least one Acked-by. Thus, if you commit other people's code
> >    unmodified you add your Ack (if and only if you think the code looks
> >    good, of course).
> 
> What about the case when a patch is slightly reworked.
> 
> I think in this case there should be a Signed-off-by: and an Acked-by:
> by the committer.

Yes, I agree. For trivial modifications just add your Signed-off-by (and
Acked-by) and commit.

For nontrivial stuff, sending a modified patch for review is better/required,
of course.


Uwe.
-- 
http://www.hermann-uwe.de  | http://www.holsham-traders.de
http://www.crazy-hacks.org | http://www.unmaintained-free-software.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://www.coreboot.org/pipermail/coreboot/attachments/20070411/ccab90d9/attachment.sig>


More information about the coreboot mailing list