From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.4 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 967501F437 for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 00:21:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751113AbdAYAVE convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Jan 2017 19:21:04 -0500 Received: from zimbra-vnc.tngtech.com ([83.144.240.98]:51998 "EHLO proxy.tng.vnc.biz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750955AbdAYAVD (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Jan 2017 19:21:03 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by proxy.tng.vnc.biz (Postfix) with ESMTP id C723F1E186C; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 01:11:51 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxy.tng.vnc.biz ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (proxy.tng.vnc.biz [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id 3paCzMwk3rK4; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 01:11:51 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by proxy.tng.vnc.biz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4686F1E2CF2; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 01:11:51 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at Received: from proxy.tng.vnc.biz ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (proxy.tng.vnc.biz [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id zB35psvDIPgm; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 01:11:51 +0100 (CET) Received: from [192.168.178.31] (aftr-185-17-206-134.dynamic.mnet-online.de [185.17.206.134]) by proxy.tng.vnc.biz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BD0671E186C; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 01:11:50 +0100 (CET) Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] completion: recognize more long-options To: Stefan Beller References: <20170122225724.19360-1-cornelius.weig@tngtech.com> <20170122225724.19360-8-cornelius.weig@tngtech.com> <74ecd09c-55da-3858-5187-52c286a6bf62@kdbg.org> <967937ff-e5ff-2515-2f50-80a96683c068@tngtech.com> Cc: Junio C Hamano , Johannes Sixt , bitte.keine.werbung.einwerfen@googlemail.com, "git@vger.kernel.org" , thomas.braun@virtuell-zuhause.de, John Keeping From: Cornelius Weig Message-ID: <923cd4e4-5c9c-4eaf-0fea-6deff6875b88@tngtech.com> Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 01:11:51 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On 01/25/2017 12:43 AM, Stefan Beller wrote: > On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 3:33 PM, Cornelius Weig > wrote: >> On 01/25/2017 12:24 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: >>> Cornelius Weig writes: >>> >>>>> Please study item (5) "Sign your work" in >>>>> Documentation/SubmittingPatches and sign off your work. >>>> >>>> I followed the recommendations to submitting work, and in the first >>>> round signing is discouraged. >>> >>> Just this point. You found a bug in our documentation if that is >>> the case; it should not be giving that impression to you. >>> >> >> Well, I am referring to par. (4) of Documentation/SubmittingPatches >> (emphasis mine): >> >> <<<<<<<<<<<<<< >> *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. >> <<<<<<<<<<<<<< >> >> If first submissions should be signed as well, then I find this quite >> misleading. >> > > Please read on; While this part addresses PGP signing, > which is discouraged at any round, > later on we talk about another type of signing. > (not cryptographic strong signing, but signing the intent;) > the DCO in the commit message. > > So no PGP signing (in any round of the patch). > > But DCO signed (in anything that you deem useful for the > project and that you are allowed to contribute) > Right, it's crystal clear now. What confused me was the combination of > Do not PGP sign your patch, at least *for now*. (...) and then the section with heading > (5) *Sign* your work So I didn't even bother to read (5) because I deemed it irrelevant. I think if it had said `(5) *Certify* your work` this would not have happened.