Re: [PATCH] Documentation: git-tag '-m' implies '-a'

From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Mar 25, 2008, 01:38 UTC
Message-ID: <20080325013842.GB15607@coredump.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <7v1w5zvqbw.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>

On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 01:07:15PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> Thanks for tidying up.  It makes my life easier.

No problem.

> >   - at least cc Junio on patch submissions to make sure he sees it
> >   - sign off your patch (either with commit -s or format-patch -s).
> 
> Heh, and you did not sign it off when you forwarded? ;-)

Heh. Believe it or not, that actually did occur to me. However, I'm not really sure what it means to do that. As you have made clear in the past, the signoff is _not_ "this looks good to me, please apply" but rather "I am signing the Certificate of Origin."

And while I can only assume that everything in such an obvious patch is kosher, it is _not_ true that:

  - I created or have the right to submit it under an open source
    license (DCO, part a)
  - The contribution was provided to me by somebody else who certified
    the above (DCO, part c)

I'm not clear on what part (b) of the DCO means. Is it making a judgement that says "even though I have no license on this, it is clearly a derivative work of git, which is GPL'd, and therefore it is GPL'd"?

-Peff