No, I have been planning to make the mass rebuild sign off on all the commits

Cool, so let's close this one then :)

I realize this is now closed, but I think that a signoff on commits from a script and/or a role account make little sense. How exactly does the user "releng@fedoraproject.org" really conform to the "I" in the Developer Certificate of Origin?

Having 'Signed-off-by:' on automated messages only weakens the notion of the signoff IMO. This discussion recently came up again on the git list, when someone wanted to add an option to enable signoff by default. Junio C Hamano's reply pointed to a post from Johannes Schindelin which reads:

On Tue, 28 Nov 2006, Andy Parkins wrote:

> The thing that's missing is a config option to make git-commit add the 
> signoff automatically.

No. As has been often said, a signoff _has_ to be a conscious act, or else 
it will lose its meaning.

Once you are reasonably convinced you want to sign off on that commit, 
just add "-s" to git-commit. And if you forgot, fix it by "git commit -s 
--amend". (Note that this is another nice example why "-a" by default 
would be wrong, wrong, wrong.)

I think that reasoning is particularly true when talking about signoff from role accounts and automated commits from scripts like the mass-rebuild script.