Re: linux-next: Signed-off-by missing for commit in the drm-misc tree

[Luben Tuikov <ltuikov89@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1.1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2131 bytes --]

On 2023-11-22 07:00, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> Hi Luben,
> 
> On Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 09:27:58AM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 09:11:43AM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote:
>>> On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 06:46:21PM -0500, Luben Tuikov wrote:
>>>> On 2023-11-13 22:08, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>>>>> BTW, cherry picking commits does not avoid conflicts - in fact it can
>>>>> cause conflicts if there are further changes to the files affected by
>>>>> the cherry picked commit in either the tree/branch the commit was
>>>>> cheery picked from or the destination tree/branch (I have to deal with
>>>>> these all the time when merging the drm trees in linux-next).  Much
>>>>> better is to cross merge the branches so that the patch only appears
>>>>> once or have a shared branches that are merged by any other branch that
>>>>> needs the changes.
>>>>>
>>>>> I understand that things are not done like this in the drm trees :-(
>>>>
>>>> Hi Stephen,
>>>>
>>>> Thank you for the clarification--understood. I'll be more careful in the future.
>>>> Thanks again! :-)
>>>
>>> In this case, the best thing to do would indeed have been to ask the
>>> drm-misc maintainers to merge drm-misc-fixes into drm-misc-next.
>>>
>>> We're doing that all the time, but we're not ubiquitous so you need to
>>> ask us :)
>>>
>>> Also, dim should have caught that when you pushed the branch. Did you
>>> use it?
>>
>> Yeah dim must be used, exactly to avoid these issues. Both for applying
>> patches (so not git am directly, or cherry-picking from your own
>> development branch), and for pushing. The latter is even checked for by
>> the server (dim sets a special push flag which is very long and contains a
>> very clear warning if you bypass it).
>>
>> If dim was used, this would be a bug in the dim script that we need to
>> fix.
> 
> It would be very useful for you to explain what happened here so we
> improve the tooling or doc and can try to make sure it doesn't happen
> again
> 
> Maxime

There is no problem with the tooling--I just forced the commit in.
-- 
Regards,
Luben

[-- Attachment #1.1.2: OpenPGP public key --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-keys, Size: 677 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 236 bytes --]