From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Subject: Re: small author mixup  (was: git pull KVM updates for 2.6.26rc)
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 10:20:32 +0200
Message-ID: <20080430082032.GA23528@elte.hu>
References: <1209310768-12322-1-git-send-email-avi@qumranet.com> <200804301012.05179.borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: Avi Kivity <avi@qumranet.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Carsten Otte <cotte@de.ibm.com>
To: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner+glk-linux-kernel-3=40m.gmane.org-S1761476AbYD3IVg@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <200804301012.05179.borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org


* Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> wrote:

> While it is not a typical case, is there a better way of specifying 
> multiple authors to avoid future confusion?

i think the established rule is that there's one Author field per 
commit. Multiple authors should either submit a tree with multiple 
commits (which shows the exact lineage of work) - or, for nontrivial 
joint work where the development tree would be way too messy, expose 
proper credits in copyrights/credit info in the source code. It's seldom 
that work is split exactly in half - better spell out who did what both 
in the source code and in the commit log - without trying to formalize 
the From/Author line. [which line will always be imprecise for multiple 
authors.]

	Ingo