From: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason Date: Fri, 07 May 2010 18:58:47 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] Hacky version of a glob() driven config include Message-ID: In-Reply-To: On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 18:29, Bert Wesarg wrote: > On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 18:56, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: >> On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 06:00, Bert Wesarg wrote: >>> On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 23:14, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: >>>> >>>> Not-signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason >>> >>> So you don't agree to the Developer's Certificate of Origin, don't you? >> >> Signed-off-by is for "if you want your work included in git.git" >> (according to Documentation/SubmittingPatches). I don't think this >> patch is ready for inclusion as-is, but I wanted to solicit comments >> on the general approach. >> > > Can you please quote SubmittingPatches for your argumentation. I already did, but here's the full paragraph I quoted from, for reference: - if you want your work included in git.git, add a "Signed-off-by: Your Name " line to the commit message (or just use the option "-s" when committing) to confirm that you agree to the Developer's Certificate of Origin I'm not seeking to include this work as-is in Git, so I added a Not-signed-off-by line to make that clear (as if all the bugs didn't do that already). I do agree to the Developer's Certificate of Origin, but just read the "Not-signed-off-by" as "you really don't want to apply this in its current state". I'm asking for comments so that I can produce an appliable patch, that one will have a Signed-off-by line.