On Fri, 27 May 2005, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> Yes, I'll occasionally do patches which were written by "A" as:
>
> From: A
> ...
> Signed-off-by: B
>
> And that comes through email as:
>
>
> ...
> From: <[email protected]>
> ...
> From: A
> ...
> Signed-off-by: B
>
>
> which means that the algorithm for identifying the author is "the final
> From:".
No, the algorithm is:
- the email author, _or_ if there is one, the top "From:" in the body.
And the rule is that you never remove (or add to) an existing From:, since
the author doesn't change from being passed around.
Put another way: authorship is very different from sign-off. The sign-off
gets stacked, the authorship is constant, and thus the rules are
different.
Also, authorship is more important than sign-off-ship, so authorship goes
at the top, while sign-offs go at the bottom.
> I guess the bug here is the use of From: to identify the primary author,
> because transporting the patch via email adds ambiguity.
No it doesn't, the email "from" just ends up being the "default" if no
explicit authorship is noted.
> Maybe we should introduce "^Author:"?
It would still have the same rules, so it wouldn't change anything but the
tag, so I don't think there is any real advantage to it.
Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
