On 1/6/2020 11:53 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Derrick Stolee <stolee@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> My initial thought was that the sign-off was supposed to be a purposeful >> decision, but then I also realized that I never do anything in the Git >> codebase that I _can't_ put online under the GPL. (It may not make it >> upstream, but it will always be put online somewhere.) > > Hmm... > > Sorry, but I do not quite understand the flow of your logic here, > especially, how "but then I also realized" trumps "signing off a > patch is a conscious act---it would weaken the legal meaning if you > automate it", which was why we deliberately avoided adding this > configuration variable for the last 10+ years. > > So, I dunno. I guess I meant that enabling this config for a repo is also a conscious act, making me think this is not completely unreasonable. But if we've already discussed and rejected this feature in the past, then that's sufficient. Since I started the line of "this isn't a bad idea" I'll follow up with the historical search. Here are previous attempts from 2018 [1], 2015 [2], 2010 [3]. Thanks, -Stolee [1] https://lore.kernel.org/git/20180204020318.4363-1-chenjingpiao@xxxxxxxxx/ [2] https://lore.kernel.org/git/1435217454-5718-1-git-send-email-cmarcelo@xxxxxxxxx/ [3] https://lore.kernel.org/git/alpine.LNX.2.00.1001131635510.16395@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
