From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ben Dooks Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] i2c-nomadik: documentation fixes Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2010 00:08:08 +0100 Message-ID: <20100928230808.GM21564@trinity.fluff.org> References: <1285225420-916-1-git-send-email-linus.walleij@stericsson.com> <20100927002508.GF21564@trinity.fluff.org> <20100927223509.GI21564@trinity.fluff.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-i2c-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Linus Walleij Cc: Ben Dooks , linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Sundar R Iyer List-Id: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 10:55:37AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote: > 2010/9/28 Ben Dooks : > > > It means that if your tree is handling external patches, then you could end > > up with the situation where it is difficult or almost impossible to undo > > a change which the original sender either did not have the authority to > > send, or has something in that should have never been sent (i've seen > > several issues where companies have had desperate back-peddling because > > someone forgot to remove some $secret from the repository before allowing > > it to be uploaded somewhere). > > We actually have that part under control, believe it or not :-) Ok, but it is probably useful for other people out there. > > It would have been helpful to add a 'From:' line as well, git can be > > made to re-write the authour of a patch, but you'll have to search for > > it. Please find a method for future reference. > > I'm on it... thanks Ben. My personal view is to always keep attributions. Even if they are then posted through someone else, or require a corporate stamp on them before they get out of the building. Let me know what you'd like to do, and I'll sort out something for -next. -- Ben Q: What's a light-year? A: One-third less calories than a regular year.