From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C557520C11 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 2017 02:10:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753248AbdK1CKX (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:10:23 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:60143 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751393AbdK1CKW (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:10:22 -0500 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 123D8A3A9B; Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:10:22 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=LKBkDDZNiZSE/EaGuXnvlc5njG4=; b=ZJ4+MG tCu+qrIpTdOfodp7fL0MZpOvkRkWKx7COZyF1AUyhSNqFyMW2XABEo/f20ntlP+4 9vO9XBPHOQQ2aleTi0m547TD31uLmT5uNQ7F5GZ8Np5PRz55fxsXtUtjUjJafFle c75gkim9Kpi77iA+PZLG2buEgEtaZoR0GZ018= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=Cy9BkebQ838zFtwogDJWqypR+TPH/MPU OgknJbRU50FPL+E7BRQoWM0H1ib4LWDazZILIibpoD/AWCmjx51XTweJUCKFWsJR CmSRiuZB7ntDH+2CHtdH8kF5LJrVLStECgYKqDOnVuXi+5mdZiEzA8LZxxEoTY6q W0q8QCVnfG4= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08167A3A9A; Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:10:22 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.0.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 75E19A3A99; Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:10:21 -0500 (EST) From: Junio C Hamano To: mwnx Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] pretty: fix buffer over-read with %> and %< References: <20171126025222.7831-1-mwnx@gmx.com> <20171127232927.x5iamt5rlxrafkhe@debian> Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2017 11:10:20 +0900 In-Reply-To: <20171127232927.x5iamt5rlxrafkhe@debian> (mwnx@gmx.com's message of "Tue, 28 Nov 2017 00:29:27 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.2.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 49A83742-D3E1-11E7-A89E-575F0C78B957-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org mwnx writes: > On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 10:46:23AM +0900, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> By the way, Documentation/SubmittingPatches has this in "(5) Certify >> your work" section: >> >> Also notice that a real name is used in the Signed-off-by: line. Please >> don't hide your real name. > > (especially since I'm not quite sure what the rationale behind it > is). As DCO is something we'd need to present to the court when the next SCO comes after us, we'd prefer to see that we can refer to, and contact if necessary, a real person when we need to say "this is not a stolen code, here is the person who presented it to us and we'll let him or her explain". > What are your thoughts on this issue? Not limited to this, but our stance for things are that previous mistakes do not justify repeating and spreading the same.