From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tony Lindgren Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/11] OMAP2+: board-generic: Add DT support to generic board Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 14:37:51 -0700 Message-ID: <20110926213750.GG6324@atomide.com> References: <1316809399-19579-1-git-send-email-b-cousson@ti.com> <1316809399-19579-8-git-send-email-b-cousson@ti.com> <20110923230845.GD6324@atomide.com> <4E80717A.3040502@ti.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4E80717A.3040502@ti.com> Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org To: "Cousson, Benoit" Cc: "grant.likely@secretlab.ca" , "paul@pwsan.com" , "Hilman, Kevin" , "Nayak, Rajendra" , "linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org" List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org * Cousson, Benoit [110926 05:01]: > On 9/24/2011 1:08 AM, Tony Lindgren wrote: > >* Benoit Cousson [110923 12:50]: > >>Re-cycle the original board-generic file to support Device Tree > >>for every OMAP2+ variants. > >>Note: Since it is a completely new content in the existing file > >>I removed the original copyright. > > > >I'd suggest just keeping it, maybe just update the comments > >accordingly? > > Do you mean keeping it and adding the comment? Or removing it and > adding the comment? Maybe just update the comment accordingly for DT? > >That's because Copyrights in general just don't "disappear". > > OK, maybe, but I thought it is weird to keep an old copyright just > because we re-use an already existing file since the content is > different. Yeah.. But it's still a good idea not to mess with the copyrights as as you would need permissions from the copyright holders. Regards, Tony