[lkml]   [2004]   [May]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [RFD] Explicitly documenting patch submission

    On Sun, 23 May 2004, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
    > 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.

    One reason that I'd prefer not to is simply the question of "who maintains
    the certificates?"

    I certainly don't want to maintain any stateful paperwork with lots of
    people. This is why I personally would prefer it all to be totally

    Also, there is a _fundamental_ problem with signing a patch in a global
    setting: the patches _do_ get modified as they move through the system
    (maybe just bug-fixes, maybe addign a missing piece, maybe removing a
    controversial part). So the signature ends up being valid only on your
    part of the communication, and then after that it needs something else.

    And what I do _not_ want to see is a system where if somebody makes a
    trivial change, it then has to go back to you to be re-signed. That just
    would be horrible.

    With those (pretty basic) caveats in mind, I don't see any fundamental
    problem in a PGP key approach, if it's a "local" thing between developers.
    In fact, I think PGP-signed patches are something we may want to look at
    from a "trust the email" standpoint, but I think it should be a _local_
    trust. And part of that "local" trust might be a private agreement between
    ddevelopers that "it's ok to add the sign-off line for Arjan when the
    patch has come with that PGP signature" when the patch is passed on.

    So to me, the sign-off procedure is really about documenting the path, and
    if a PGP key is there in certain parts of the path, then that would be a
    good thing, but I think it's a separate thing from what I'm looking for.

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2009-11-18 23:46    [W:0.020 / U:13.728 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site