Re: [PATCH v6 1/3] dt-bindings: arm: rockchip: Add Radxa CM5 IO Board

["Heiko Stübner" <heiko@sntech.de>]

Am Freitag, 14. November 2025, 09:32:29 Mitteleuropäische Normalzeit schrieb Dragan Simic:
> On Friday, November 14, 2025 09:24 CET, FUKAUMI Naoki <naoki@radxa.com> wrote:
> > On 11/14/25 16:51, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > > On 14/11/2025 08:47, FUKAUMI Naoki wrote:
> > >> On 11/14/25 16:42, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > >>> On 14/11/2025 08:37, FUKAUMI Naoki wrote:
> > >>>> Hi Krzysztof,
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On 11/14/25 16:12, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > >>>>> On 05/11/2025 08:08, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > >>>>>> On 05/11/2025 07:57, FUKAUMI Naoki wrote:
> > >>>>>>> On 11/5/25 15:43, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > >>>>>>>> On 05/11/2025 06:13, FUKAUMI Naoki wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>> Add device tree binding documentation for the Radxa CM5 IO Board.
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> Link: https://dl.radxa.com/cm5/radxa_cm5_product_brief.pdf
> > >>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: FUKAUMI Naoki <naoki@radxa.com>
> > >>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Joseph Kogut <joseph.kogut@gmail.com>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Wrong DCO chain.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> ---
> > >>>>>>>>>      Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml | 7 +++++++
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> NAK, you just stolen ownership of an already posted patch.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Read "Changes in v6" and patches; my patches are not the same as v5.
> > >>>>>>> Your reply is totally inappropriate.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Inappropriate is taking authorship of someone's patch, because we all
> > >>>>>> expect to preserve the original authorship. That's not only basic
> > >>>>>> decency but actually a standard.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Additionally, read Joseph's reply that he wants to continue the work:
> > >>>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAMWSM7iHtAxewW4JkRqRsifVnccqeFviaCgeOyprKDr92FOurg@mail.gmail.com/
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> You clearly do not understand how to continue with someone's work.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> It is still a NAK.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> And I still wait for justification why you took authorship of this
> > >>>>> patch, because to my eye you changed here nothing.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> So what did you change HERE that you think you are the author now?
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Changes in v6:
> > >>>> (Patch 1/3)
> > >>>> - Fix description; "Radxa CM5" is the correct name
> > >>>
> > >>> HERE, in this patch. Don't paste me hundreds of unrelated code. Write
> > >>> concise and precise answers/comments.
> > >>
> > >> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-rockchip/AE0735A6C797CCFF+10496d73-7c0a-4884-9561-24721305a24f@radxa.com/
> > >>
> > >> | By the way, at some point I switched from "continuing your work" to
> > >> | "recreating a new one based on my current work." The results of my
> > >> | current work(*3) have changed significantly.
> > > 
> > > So next time I will take your patch, your code, say "I recreated it" and
> > > submit under my authorship and for you it is fine?
> > 
> > Regarding CM5 patches, I'm fine.
> > 
> > > Please take Joseph's patch instead. Read submitting patches doc to
> > > understand which one more tag has to be added when sending somoene
> > > else's work.
> > > 
> > > In the future, I sincerely suggest avoiding re-creating people's work
> > > but building on top, because you just duplicate the effort.
> > 
> > I understand that you don't understand how I made efforts to build my 
> > work on top of Joseph's patches.
> 
> Maybe a solution for this huge mess could be that Naoki submits
> unmodified patches from Joseph first, using the standard procedure
> for that, and then the additional patch(es) that improve Joseph's
> work?  All that in the same series.

There is also Co-developed-by as an option.