On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 6:23 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> OK, I didn't know that was acceptable in the kernel community
> to have random comments like that inside the block. Can these
> comments span multiple paragraphs? What I am wondering is what
> you want to see in a case like this:
>
> Signed-off-by: Noam Camus <noamc@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Acked-by: Vineet Gupta <vgupta@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> [ Also removed pointless cast from "void *". - Linus]
> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> [ Ahh, we have to tell at least these people
>
> - stakeholder class 1
> - staeholder class 2
> ]
> Cc: foo
> Cc: bar
So quite frankly, at that point if git doesn't recognize it as a
sign-off block, I don't think it's a big deal.
That said, the original "git am" rules actually seem to be rather
straightforward: it's never an issue about "last block of text", and
it's simply an issue of "is there a sign-ff _anywhere_ in the text".
That simplicity has a certain appeal to me. I don't think it was
necessarily written that way because it was "well designed" - I
suspect it is more an issue of "easy to implement in a shell-script".
And it's possible that I'm mis-reading the scripts too. It's not like
I _remember_ what the exact behavior was, I just think it used to work
really well for us (ie I don't recall seeing lots of those empty lines
in the middle of the sign-off block before, and this current merge
window it happened for four of the emails I applied from Andrew's
119-patch series..
Four out of 119 emails may not be a big percentage, but it does mean
that it's not horribly unusual either..
Linus
--
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