git/list[1] front-page[2] threads[3] people[4] search[5] about
 

Re: [PATCH/RFC] Hacky version of a glob() driven config include

From
Jacob Helwig <jacob.helwig@gmail.com>
Date
May 7, 2010, 19:02 UTC
Message-ID
<v2g8c9a061005071202h820ef8a6nab023868fec28222@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To
<AANLkTilG5OGjQcd1Vd1CdyOibFh4Po6jdfvSRNidrRzh@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 11:58, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> wrote:
Show 35 quoted lines
> On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 18:29, Bert Wesarg <bert.wesarg@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> 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 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 <you@example.com>" 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.
>

Having "[RFC]" instead of "[PATCH]" as the subject prefix is typically considered sufficient to indicate "this isn't actually intended for inclusion".

Previous: Ævar Arnfjörð BjarmasonNext: Bert Wesarg
Message 12 of 21 in “Is there interest in reading ~/.gitconfig.d/* and /etc/gitconfig.d/*?”
  1. Ævar Arnfjörð BjarmasonApr 1, 2010
  2. Heiko VoigtApr 1, 2010
  3. Peter KreftingApr 4, 2010
  4. Eli BarzilayApr 4, 2010
  5. Ævar Arnfjörð BjarmasonApr 6, 2010
  6. Jakub NarebskiApr 6, 2010
  7. Hacky version of a glob() driven config includeÆvar Arnfjörð Bjarmason, May 6, 2010
  8. Bert WesargMay 7, 2010
  9. Ævar Arnfjörð BjarmasonMay 7, 2010
  10. Bert WesargMay 7, 2010
  11. Ævar Arnfjörð BjarmasonMay 7, 2010
  12. Jacob HelwigMay 7, 2010
  13. Bert WesargMay 7, 2010
  14. Hacky version of a glob() driven config includeÆvar Arnfjörð Bjarmason, May 7, 2010
  15. Jakub NarebskiMay 7, 2010
  16. Ævar Arnfjörð BjarmasonMay 7, 2010
  17. Jakub NarebskiMay 7, 2010
  18. Ping YinMay 8, 2010
  19. Jakub NarebskiMay 8, 2010
  20. Ping YinMay 8, 2010
  21. Jeff KingMay 8, 2010

Read the whole thread, see it on lore, or plain text.

$ cat FOOTERMessages come from the public archive at lore.kernel.org/git, fetched every hour. The front page is chosen and written each morning by an AI editor and can be wrong; the threads themselves are the record. About and API. For agents: an MCP server at https://gitlist.dev/mcp, and any thread, story or person page as Markdown by adding .md to its URL (or sending Accept: text/markdown). Details in /llms.txt.