From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jesse Barnes Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] Nexus One Support Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 09:56:58 -0800 Message-ID: <20110121095658.1ab623fe@jbarnes-desktop> References: <1295555565-21563-1-git-send-email-dwalker@codeaurora.org> <1295571359.9236.53.camel@m0nster> <1295574085.4096.6.camel@Joe-Laptop> <1295575123.9236.54.camel@m0nster> <1295576730.4096.24.camel@Joe-Laptop> <1295624801.19880.13.camel@m0nster> <20110121094827.41818a55@jbarnes-desktop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20110121094827.41818a55@jbarnes-desktop> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Cc: Daniel Walker , Joe Perches , Dima Zavin , linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, davidb@codeaurora.org List-Id: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 09:48:27 -0800 Jesse Barnes wrote: > On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 07:46:41 -0800 > Daniel Walker wrote: > > This isn't what's happening tho. In maintainer land if someone forwards > > you a patch then you leave the original author on the patch. They wrote > > the patch and your just forwarding it on up the ladder. This isn't the > > case with these patches.. I crafted each of the commit I have authorship > > on, no one forwarded those commits to me. I'm not taking authorship > > credit for any thing I didn't create, although I an giving credit to the > > place which gave me the raw material which was Google. From my > > experience this is how it's done in Linux .. > > I don't know why you're even trying to defend this, just admit you were > wrong and move on. > > Trying to claim the author field for these patches for yourself is both > misleading and vain. You did not write the code and are therefore not > the author, trying to conflate the author and commit fields in this way > is so misguided I thought you must be trolling when I first saw this > thread. > > This is not "how it's done in Linux" at all. In this case you're > trying to act like a maintainer by collecting patches and forwarding > them upstream, so you need to preserve authorship and the s-o-b chain. > If you want to take responsibility for the code going forward, great, > but don't pollute the logs with bogus author fields that imply you > wrote the stuff in the first place. That said, if you did significant work on these before committing them, then you're right and I'm wrong. It *is* fairly common for committers to change things; and if the changes are significant enough, they claim authorship and note the original author in the changelog. So if that's the case here, I apologize, but I didn't see that explained in any part of the thread I read. -- Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center