[libvirt] [PATCH] docs: document requirement to provide Signed-off-by lines for DCO

[Ján Tomko]

On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 02:28:14PM +0100, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
>On Mon, 2018-01-22 at 12:40 +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>> Document that contributors are required to assert compliance with the
>> Developers Certification of Origin 1.1, by providing Signed-off-by tags
>
>Both here...
>
>> for all commit messages. The DCO is formally stating what we have long
>> implicitly expected of contributors in terms of their legal rights to
>> make the contribution. This puts the project in a stronger position
>> should any questions around contributions be raised going forward in the
>> future.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Berrange <berrange at redhat.com>
>> ---
>>  docs/hacking.html.in | 12 +++++++++---
>>  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/docs/hacking.html.in b/docs/hacking.html.in
>> index 6cadfb8343..98a24d785c 100644
>> --- a/docs/hacking.html.in
>> +++ b/docs/hacking.html.in
>> @@ -108,12 +108,18 @@
>>            of the bug number is useful; but also summarize the issue
>>            rather than making all readers follow the link.  You can use
>>            'git shortlog -30' to get an idea of typical summary lines.
>> -          Libvirt does not currently attach any meaning to
>> -          Signed-off-by: lines, so it is up to you if you want to
>> -          include or omit them in the commit message.
>>          </p>
>>        </li>
>>
>> +      <li><p>Contributors to libvirt projects <strong>must</strong>
>> +          assert that they are in compliance with the
>> +          <a href="https://developercertificate.org/">Developers
>> +            Certificate of Origin 1.1</a>. This is achieved by adding
>
>... and here, use either "Developer Certificate of Origin" or
>"Developer's Certificate of Origin" - the DCO website irritatingly
>uses both wordings :(
>
>> +          a "Signed-off-by" line to every commit message. The presence

"line containing the contributor's name and e-mail" maybe?
I presume just 'Signed-off-by' is not enough for the "legal snake oil",
even though it's all the git hook asks for.

>> +          of this line attests that the contributor has read the
>> +          above lined DCO and agrees with its statements.
>> +      </p></li>
>
>The indentation is off in the above paragraph.
>
>Other than that it looks good, so
>
>  Reviewed-by: Andrea Bolognani <abologna at redhat.com>
>
>but I'm wondering if we need some sort of vote or agreement at the
>community level before this can be formalized and enforced.

There will never be agreement.

But from the git hook thread:
In favor: Dan, John, Michal(?)
Indifferent: Erik
Against: Me, Peter

Which already is some kind of vote, so I'll give this one:
"Meh, ACK, please don't try to make another tag mandatory in the
future"

Jan
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/attachments/20180124/eb99fed6/attachment-0001.sig>