Re: SubmittingPatches: drop temporal reference for PGP signing
On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 10:54 PM, Philip Oakley <philipoakley@iee.org> wrote:
Show 17 quoted lines
>> -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. 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.
>
>
> Wouldn't this also benefit from a forward reference to the section 5 on the
> DOC signining? This would avoid Cornelius's case where he felt that section
> 5 no longer applied.
Yeah I agree. My patch was not the best shot by far.
Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>