Mark Goodwin wrote:
Eric Sandeen wrote:
Lachlan McIlroy wrote:
Eric Sandeen wrote:
Lachlan McIlroy wrote:
Please pull from the for-linus branch:
git pull git://oss.sgi.com:8090/xfs/xfs-2.6.git for-linus
This will update the following files:
fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_super.c | 14 +++++++-------
fs/xfs/xfs_clnt.h | 2 +-
fs/xfs/xfs_ialloc.c | 2 +-
fs/xfs/xfs_mount.h | 2 +-
fs/xfs/xfs_vfsops.c | 4 ++--
5 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
through these commits:
commit b7405bb65a83e819dd3b21a6d9636c279d9ce79a
Author: Niv Sardi <xaiki@xxxxxxx>
um, I thought Jeff wrote that patch.
I'm sure he did too. Every now and then our ptools -> git merge
tools stuff up.
IMHO it's worth finding out why; authorship should not be taken lightly.
-Eric
yes I agree. Niv's take:
Inspected by: bnaujok,jeffpc
and no Signed-off
Lachlan, would that have confused the scripts?
Yes it would.
One needs the signed-off-by's.
From our sgi internal web page...
==============================================================================
Bad ptool checkin descriptions
Bad checkin descriptions for XFS to ptools are ones which are missing a one
line overall description and ones where the mod has an external author and
there is no Signed-Off-By lines for him/her.
So what you need to have is:...
The first line to be a summary description. Then if you need further details,
then add a blank line followed by more details in further paragraphs.
Then end with the signed-off-by's. The script needs signed-off-by to determine
real author and Linus uses the first line as a summary line in his summary code.
The script will look at the ptools mod reviewer list to add in further
signed-off-by's when it gets converted to git. So you only need 1 signed-off-by
for the external author and if it is just an internal author, you don't need any
signed-off-bys. (And yes ideally, the reviewers should probably be acked-by...
it is on the TODO list).
==============================================================================
--Tim
|