From: Bert Wesarg <bert.wesarg@googlemail.com>
Date: Fri, 07 May 2010 18:29:27 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] Hacky version of a glob() driven config include
Message-ID: <AANLkTilp0d28QMs_K7cVrfqmkzeqs8FTJbU1oeuUy7V6@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinhh8TXY9r9Jf394YKYXDxpU65qjg7MbPcb12Ls@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 18:56, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 06:00, Bert Wesarg <bert.wesarg@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 23:14, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Not-signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
>>
>> 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 think you mix technical and legal aspects of submitting patches.

Thank you and please note I'm not a lawyer.

Bert