Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Hi again,
>
> [+CC: Junio Hamano, our maintainer]
>
> David A. Greene wrote:
>> I've read that document. The issue is that I didn't develop the code,
>> Avery did.
>
> Not an issue as long as you have Avery's signoff.
As in a signed-off-by log entry on the commit? I did a commit -s to add
my own signed-off-by tag and added a "From:" line in accordance with the
SubmittingPatches document:
"If you are forwarding a patch from somebody else, optionally, at the
beginning of the e-mail message just before the commit message starts,
you can put a "From: " line to name that person."
I have not used signoffs before in my day-to-day git flow. How do I go
about getting one from Avery and incorporating it into the history in an
autheticated way? I'm assuming you don't want me to forge his sign-off.
:)
>> It's a lot of time to learn a
>> completely new codebase. I was hoping to submit something soon and then
>> learn the codebase gradually during maintenance/further development.
>
> We certainly don't want badly reviewed code that nobody understands
> floating around in the codebase-
Certainly, I'm not trying to avoid review, just trying to figure out the
most efficient mechanics.
> so, I'd suggest sending out whatever you think is appropriate for the
> first round of reviews, and see how things shape up from there.
Fair enough. I think I will take Jeff's suggested route and see where
that goes.
>> How have completely new tools be introduced into the git mainline in the
>> past?
>
> Yes. For an example of something I was involved with but didn't
> author, see vcs-svn/.
Ok, I'll look into that. Thanks for the pointer.
-Dave
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html