Re: [RFD] Explicitly documenting patch submission

[Ian Stirling]

Greg KH wrote:
> On Sun, May 23, 2004 at 10:02:17AM +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 2004-05-23 at 08:46, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> > > Hola!
> > >
> > > This is a request for discussion..
> >
> > Can we make this somewhat less cumbersome even by say, allowing
> > developers to file a gpg key and sign a certificate saying "all patches
> > that I sign with that key are hereby under this regime". I know you hate
> > it but the FSF copyright assignment stuff at least has such "do it once
> > for forever" mechanism making the pain optionally only once.
>
>
> I don't think that adding a single line to ever patch description is
> really "pain".  Especially compared to the FSF proceedure :)
>
> Also, gpg signed patches are a pain to handle on the maintainer's side
> of things, speaking from personal experience.  However our patch


Has anyone ever tried to forge the name on a patch, and get it included?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/