On 17. 01. 19 17:26, Adam Williamson wrote:
If a project is enforcing sign-off but doesn't have
the DCO or any other kind of prominent statement of what the sign-off
is*for*, that is meaningless, because there's no reasonable context
for the sign-off text.
Exactly.
Also, the text sometimes is a bit weird:
(fedpkg as an example)
"All commits must be signed-off on. Please use git commit -s to do that. This
serves as a confirmation that you have the right to submit your changes. See
Developer Certificate of Origin for details."
This should IMHO rather say something like:
"We require all the contributors to agree with the Developer Certificate of
Origin. To confirm that you do, sign off your commits. Please use git commit -s
to do that."
What bothers me that while I understand that there is some meaning for the
signed-off commits (however snake oil legalese it really appears), the
enforcement doesn't explain it and simply says: Sign off your commits! Do it!
You have to!
And when you do, you do it because it's a technical requirement. You are not
aware that you are performing some kind of agreement with a legal document.
So to make this a bit better, can we change the enforcement wording on Pagure?
Say:
We require all the contributors to agree with the Developer Certificate of
Origin. To confirm that you do, sign off your commits. Please use git commit -s
to do that. We unfortunately don't accept commits without that.
Instead of:
Sign your commits!
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
