From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752418AbdH3ReV (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Aug 2017 13:34:21 -0400 Received: from ozlabs.org ([103.22.144.67]:41141 "EHLO ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751911AbdH3ReU (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Aug 2017 13:34:20 -0400 Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2017 03:34:00 +1000 From: Stephen Rothwell To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Jens Axboe , Linux-Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Sagi Grimberg , Arnav Dawn , Guan Junxiong , Max Gurtovoy , James Smart , Martin Wilck , "Jan H. =?UTF-8?B?U2Now7ZuaGVycg==?=" , "Martin K. Petersen" , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Philipp Reisner , Lars Ellenberg , Roland Kammerer Subject: Re: linux-next: Signed-off-bys missing for commits in the block tree Message-ID: <20170831033400.423f0e6b@canb.auug.org.au> In-Reply-To: <20170830170936.GA3925@lst.de> References: <20170831030647.19c22478@canb.auug.org.au> <20170830170936.GA3925@lst.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by nfs id v7UHYRq2024432 Hi Christoph, On Wed, 30 Aug 2017 19:09:36 +0200 Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > They all have singnoffs from the original committer. It's just > that we team-maintain the tree and had a rebase. > > Are we supposed to add another Signoff just for the rebase? >>From a previous discussion, Linus said: "On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 5:28 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > I would say that if you rebase someone's commit(s), then you are on the > "patch's delivery path" and so should add a Signed-off-by tag. Yeah, I agree. Rebasing really is pretty much the exact same thing as applying a patch." So, yes, you are suppose to. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell