Linus Torvalds wrote:Putting the From: in the Signed-off-by block is a result of two thoughts: 1. putting it at the top makes the most sense from an email perspective, but it often seem to get lost by various patch-posting programs if it gets tangled in the Subject/summary part of the patch. The result is that it needs to float in an odd way: Subject: wooble the foo From: Foo Woobler <foo@wooble.com> Wooble foos in the appropriate manner. Signed-off-by: Foo Woobler <foo@wooble.com> Cc: Bar Mangler <bar@mangle.org> 2. There's already a block of email addresses which describe how people relate to this patch, so why not put From: there (since it isn't really an email From header, but a patch metadata header). I'd assumed that tools which pick "Thing: Email" pairs out of a patch would deal with From in the same place as a Signed-off-by. After all, tools deal with Cc:s there. I'll make sure From: is in the right place in future, but I just wanted to point out it wasn't complete randomness. J --
| Amit K. Arora | [RFC] Heads up on sys_fallocate() |
| Tarkan Erimer | Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 |
| Greg Kroah-Hartman | [PATCH 001/196] Chinese: Add the known_regression URI to the HOWTO |
git: | |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 27/37] dccp: Integration of dynamic feature activation - part 2 (server side) |
| Jarek Poplawski | Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| David Miller | [GIT]: Networking |
| Matheos Worku | 2.6.24 BUG: soft lockup - CPU#X |
