On 2022-09-16 at 16:03, Diederik de Haas wrote: > On Friday, 16 September 2022 20:41:33 CEST Chuck Zmudzinski wrote: >>>> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=983357#97 >>>> >>>> I don't think I can sign-off on a patch written by Ben >>>> Hutchings. > > You shouldn't use a Signed-Off 'tag' without someone explicit > permission. You can send the exact same patch with only your > Signed-Off tag (required for patches submitted to the Linux kernel) > though ... It's been quite a few years, but last I remember seeing this discussed on the LKML, I think the upshot of that discussion was that Signed-off-by: for kernel patches is intended to indicate that the indicated person (who should be the same person adding the tag) is certifying that the code being submitted is licensed in such a way that it would not conflict with the license terms that cover the Linux kernel. In practice I think it tends to be used for other purposes (instead or as well), but I believe I've seen it stated that that's the core intent of the tag. If that's not correct, I'd be glad to be corrected on that front and learn what the intent and scope of that tag actually are, but it's been my understanding for - as I said - quite a few years now. -- The Wanderer The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature