From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tom Rini Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2016 14:15:29 -0400 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH 13/60] ARM: tegra: sort some board file include directives In-Reply-To: <571F9608.2050204@wwwdotorg.org> References: <1461099580-3866-1-git-send-email-swarren@wwwdotorg.org> <1461099580-3866-14-git-send-email-swarren@wwwdotorg.org> <20160424102050.AD0C110028B@atlas.denx.de> <571E75E2.6020008@wwwdotorg.org> <20160425215939.C82CD100386@atlas.denx.de> <20160425232226.GH29322@bill-the-cat> <571F9608.2050204@wwwdotorg.org> Message-ID: <20160426181529.GV29322@bill-the-cat> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 10:23:36AM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote: > On 04/25/2016 05:22 PM, Tom Rini wrote: > > >Lawyers can argue, but projects have guidelines. I mean heck, I've see > >you remind people to fix the include order in new patches. Do they need > >to add an NVIDIA copyright notice too? No, of course not. > > Well honestly all patch review does contribute to the creative > process and affect the final result, so I don't actually think it'd > be that much of a stretch that a reviewer's copyright applies to the > final patch; they were involved in the creation of it. Perhaps > Reviewed-by tags or the mailing list history would be enough > evidence of this though, if such were needed later. And this is why I love patchwork and hope that as it starts to handle series more directly it will also handle "For the series, ..." messages in addition to collecting up Acked/Reviewed/Tested by lines. These are important for history of changes to the codebase. -- Tom -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: