Re: [PATCH 08/11] transport-pci: Introduce virtio extended capability

["Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>]

On Mon, Apr 10, 2023 at 07:57:08PM +0000, Parav Pandit wrote:
> 
> > From: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
> > Sent: Monday, April 10, 2023 3:49 PM
> 
> > Attribution is nice but Signed-off-by is not that.
> 
> Then what is Signed-off-by for virtio spec?

we never defined it. using it kind of by 

> Can it be same definition as what Linux kernel and many other projects use like [1]?
> 
> [1] https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html?highlight=signed%20off

That is DCO. useful for linux pointless for us as is since
we want people to agree to our IPR.
Unless you want to make DCO refer to our IPR.
That might be possible.
We will need to float this past OASIS stuff.
I prefer explicit agreement to license personally.

> > And fundamentally people go read the PDF where the Signed-off-by does not
> > appear at all no one pokes at git history.
> When people read PDF, they do not care about the sign-off. Signed-off-by is not for that.
> 
> > Let's just do:
> > 
> > Thanks-to: name <email>
> > 
> Why to now learn a new term?
> Why terminology of [1] is not enough like AQ status codes? :)

I have no idea what problem you are trying to address.
If it is attribution Signed-off-by is not that.
If it is IPR Signed-off-by is not that either but might be
made to imply that.

> > if you want attribution.
> > 
> > will be helpful to fill in the thanks section in the spec and does not mention
> > signatures.