Re: SubmittingPatches: drop temporal reference for PGP signing
- From
Philip Oakley <philipoakley@iee.org>
- Date
- Jan 26, 2017, 20:59 UTC
- Message-ID
- <4B89512D54614F09817EA9901A8B625D@PhilipOakley>
- In-Reply-To
- <xmqqpoj965yf.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
From: "Junio C Hamano" <gitster@pobox.com>
Show 9 quoted lines
> Cornelius Weig <cornelius.weig@tngtech.com> writes: > >> How about something along these lines? Does the forward reference >> break the main line of thought too severly? > > I find it a bit distracting for those who know PGP signing has > nothing to do with signing off your patch, but I think that is OK > because they are not the primary target audience of this part of the > document.
Agreed. I this case the target audience was those weren't aware of that.
Show 10 quoted lines
> > I however am more worried that it may be misleading to mention these > two in the same sentence. Those who skim these paragraphs without > knowing the difference between the two may get a false impression > that these two may somehow be related because they are mentioned in > the same sentence. > > The retitling of section (5) you did, without any other change, > might be sufficient. It may also help to be even more explicit in > the updated title, i.e. s/by signing off/by adding Signed-off-by:/
Maybe even s/by signing off/by adding your Signed-off-by:/ to be sure that the reader knows that it is _their certification_ that is being sought. Even if it does double up on the 'your'.
Show 42 quoted lines
> > Thanks. > >> diff --git a/Documentation/SubmittingPatches >> b/Documentation/SubmittingPatches >> index 08352de..c2b0cbe 100644 >> --- a/Documentation/SubmittingPatches >> +++ b/Documentation/SubmittingPatches >> @@ -216,12 +216,12 @@ that it will be postponed. >> Exception: If your mailer is mangling patches then someone may ask >> you to re-send them using MIME, that is OK. >> >> -Do not PGP sign your patch, at least for now. Most likely, your >> -maintainer or other people on the list would not have your PGP >> -key and would not bother obtaining it anyway. Your patch is not >> -judged by who you are; a good patch from an unknown origin has a >> -far better chance of being accepted than a patch from a known, >> -respected origin that is done poorly or does incorrect things. >> +Do not PGP sign your patch, but do sign-off your work as explained in >> (5). >> +Most likely, your maintainer or other people on the list would not have >> your >> +PGP key and would not bother obtaining it anyway. Your patch is not >> judged by >> +who you are; a good patch from an unknown origin has a far better chance >> of >> +being accepted than a patch from a known, respected origin that is done >> poorly >> +or does incorrect things. >> >> If you really really really really want to do a PGP signed >> patch, format it as "multipart/signed", not a text/plain message >> @@ -246,7 +246,7 @@ patch. >> *2* The mailing list: git@vger.kernel.org >> >> >> -(5) Sign your work >> +(5) Certify your work by signing off >> >> To improve tracking of who did what, we've borrowed the >> "sign-off" procedure from the Linux kernel project on patches >