Jiang Xin <worldhello.net@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Scan the whole rfc2822 footer for duplicate S-o-b, not just the last > line of the commit message. > > A commit may have multiple S-o-bs, or other tags, such as: > > some commit log... > > Signed-off-by: C O Mitter <committer@xxxxxxxxxxx> > Reported-by: R E Porter <reporter@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > Because the S-o-b is not located at the last line in the above commit, > when the above commit is amended by the original committer, a > duplicated S-o-b may appended by accident. New commit log may looks > like: > > some commit log... > > Signed-off-by: C O Mitter <committer@xxxxxxxxxxx> > Reported-by: R E Porter <reporter@xxxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: C O Mitter <committer@xxxxxxxxxxx> > After stating the observation like the above, please make it a habit to say "which is bad because...", if you think it is a bad behaviour and the patch is about fixing it. Because a chain of S-o-b is used to record the flow of a patch, it is entirely normal if developer A writes the patch (she signs it off), reviewer B picks it up and sends it back with a minor fix-up to the list, and developer A again picks it up from the list and forwards it to the uplevel maintainer, in which case you may see S-o-b by A, then B (it may be S-o-b or something else, e.g. Reviewed-by) and then S-o-b by A again. The above observation is correct (a commit log may look like so), but your untold conclusion (it is a bad thing because there are S-o-b from the same person twice) is not necessarily correct. -- 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