[Sugar-devel] Usage of Signed-off-by / Acked-by - Re: Recent movement on Sugar master repository

[Manuel Quiñones]

As we are revisiting all the review process, can we revisit the usage
of signing the patches?  What are they useful for?

2013/4/2 Daniel Narvaez <dwnarvaez at gmail.com>:
> So I'm not sure these are worth the overhead. Especially for  signing it
> doesn't seem to be very useful for us, if not in some special cases, and it
> adds one more thing we need to require from contributors... I'd rather bug
> them about improving the code then about using a tag of dubious utility.
>
> Just my feeling really, I'm happy to keep using the tags if we think they
> are necessary. Just trying to streamline things a bit if possible.

Yes, I agree with you Daniel.  I think we need the point of view of
other devs, specially from those who are in the project prior than us.

>
> On 2 April 2013 19:25, Manuel Quiñones <manuq at laptop.org> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Daniel,
>>
>> 2013/4/2 Daniel Narvaez <dwnarvaez at gmail.com>:
>> > Hey,
>> >
>> > sorry, I forgot about those. Though I think it's worth to think if we
>> > really
>> > need them while we are reworking reviews a bit.
>> >
>> > When is signed-off-by useful in sugar?
>>
>> I think we just have been following other projects like the linux
>> kernel.  In many projects this means "I certify that my code is
>> compatible with the license of this project".  For me, it is useful
>> only if the commiter is another user, to track the real author.
>>
>> http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Development_Team/Code_Review
>>
>> > How is reviewed-by applied? Is it the reviewer which rebase and add them
>> > before pushing?
>>
>> Yes we have been amending the patches before pushing, all manual work.
>>  For me, the Acked-by signing has been useful to track who reviewed
>> what.  But maybe not a big deal?
>>
>> So there are projects that do signing, and projects that don't.  I
>> searched quickly for a way to add Acked-by when github merges a pull
>> request, but haven't found anything.
>>
>> > On 2 April 2013 18:30, Manuel Quiñones <manuq at laptop.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hi devs,
>> >>
>> >> I've seen some movement in current master.  I suppose all this was
>> >> reviewed, but what I wonder is if we are sticking to the signed-off-by
>> >> / acked-by signing.
>> >>
>> >> The commits in question are:
>> >>
>> >> commit f423ec21b4bf0d953a470a383cc801b61a087e98
>> >> Author: Walter Bender <walter.bender at gmail.com>
>> >> Date:   Sat Mar 30 16:06:00 2013 -0400
>> >>
>> >>     Add comment box to expanded entry
>> >>
>> >> commit 541af0166030a5f3b7b52bdc23d416dbf688b5e9
>> >> Author: Walter Bender <walter.bender at gmail.com>
>> >> Date:   Sat Mar 30 10:45:22 2013 -0400
>> >>
>> >>     Add CommentView widget to expanded entry
>> >>
>> >> commit 248a758875e5a02a53ae57980f4fe2f3bb0bb91e
>> >> Author: Walter Bender <walter.bender at gmail.com>
>> >> Date:   Thu Mar 28 15:26:17 2013 -0400
>> >>
>> >>     Make a separate method for _write_entry so method can be reused
>> >>
>> >> commit 1af4b5ec7f03ed43da1616df946fe936e8577e91
>> >> Author: Walter Bender <walter.bender at gmail.com>
>> >> Date:   Thu Mar 28 15:25:41 2013 -0400
>> >>
>> >>     Pass a widget to _create_scrollable so method can be reused
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> .. manuq ..
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Sugar-devel mailing list
>> >> Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
>> >> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Daniel Narvaez
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> .. manuq ..
>
>
>
>
> --
> Daniel Narvaez



--
.. manuq ..