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=-5.5 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM,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 49B7B1F6DC for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 22:38:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752554AbdAYWiZ (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Jan 2017 17:38:25 -0500 Received: from mail-io0-f169.google.com ([209.85.223.169]:36244 "EHLO mail-io0-f169.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752366AbdAYWiY (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Jan 2017 17:38:24 -0500 Received: by mail-io0-f169.google.com with SMTP id j13so25628884iod.3 for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 14:38:24 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=rH/Hr52HAe79De/+Q+/tQ4z2N2qiCZrR6tAaSI7Fk5c=; b=YXM9b4b80qKmxXtjUUxmt60jvC4oUtP8Le3A9GwT5RQDA28KlMBkXX17nc57CVd42z zGz4a8BlDrt60zC2mJP9CaI1EwH/021oSrV5SJtO9BWmPUXV/BmyA+0b+s0Yu5YwmiSO rfwnvMAaseDl17xuv4aFfzaXZrE5YAZVfpGl8bSn4aCtGCgHsfEMTMIry15CVnUBNu3B wLV4/uVkoEkbirVcCPcI9XooiwqnQC23BjoAZz4FSdpo2/ADok9tur5XOD3JIijjvrut XrzMivkyvIu9yc5D5dBfppFaLZ6y5cbZhArOLYm+9jckq8ZB+gi9dzlP4k7AOAfAd+4n sRQg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=rH/Hr52HAe79De/+Q+/tQ4z2N2qiCZrR6tAaSI7Fk5c=; b=iiHagfpuKr3s5s1F23UX0gC/vw8Z8Qv7Nl+IsIEdzI1Ob3etzGxuVMVCrD8s1G681p b/bXNK/SZfqSq9C302C5ohOEllkrRDbpz/2iBrwm4L6wjzAq8X2hJ4KzRuyErlBXbG4x KEN5qpgsyQlT8p/5w94wKVa7hvoGGiPNVO36rxIvQH+U/G7v0dT2DSZjWe9bM5Aj9j39 KlFmvfOq6oAZXHmnHqVWepe87PrKTn5jMe2mVJa1o7PeYiJWpg8DrhzhX21moeZU3fUd xi7kSu8vwrz3To6Ajd5P24ixOVVMHMQD4cqnxsYzVlBcNypGAhuF3m/FyBS1NiTeOfH6 6eKQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXIBbPrYtEqO3xIa92jkc8RiJ/Ijw066Rqp+jq4F47c8GhVieL2rUzZVWxgLGTLFHoJz2nXDzrJbHMl7vUFa X-Received: by 10.107.3.160 with SMTP id e32mr231336ioi.52.1485383903890; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 14:38:23 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.79.39.19 with HTTP; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 14:38:23 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <33E354BCDB9A4192B69B9B399381659E@PhilipOakley> References: <923cd4e4-5c9c-4eaf-0fea-6deff6875b88@tngtech.com> <20170125002116.22111-1-sbeller@google.com> <33E354BCDB9A4192B69B9B399381659E@PhilipOakley> From: Stefan Beller Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 14:38:23 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: SubmittingPatches: drop temporal reference for PGP signing To: Philip Oakley Cc: Cornelius Weig , Johannes Sixt , bitte.keine.werbung.einwerfen@googlemail.com, "git@vger.kernel.org" , Junio C Hamano , thomas.braun@virtuell-zuhause.de, John Keeping Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 10:54 PM, Philip Oakley wrote: >> -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.