From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from e4.ny.us.ibm.com (e4.ny.us.ibm.com [32.97.182.144]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "e4.ny.us.ibm.com", Issuer "Equifax" (verified OK)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA2A1DE095 for ; Wed, 9 Jan 2008 07:20:56 +1100 (EST) Received: from d01relay02.pok.ibm.com (d01relay02.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.234]) by e4.ny.us.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m08KKrDw020530 for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 15:20:53 -0500 Received: from d01av04.pok.ibm.com (d01av04.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.64]) by d01relay02.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v8.7) with ESMTP id m08KKruv411910 for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 15:20:53 -0500 Received: from d01av04.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d01av04.pok.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id m08KKrgP023410 for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 15:20:53 -0500 Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 14:20:48 -0600 From: Josh Boyer To: avorontsov@ru.mvista.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] Hwmon for Taco Message-ID: <20080108142048.4a3951cc@zod.rchland.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <20080108201314.GA29127@localhost.localdomain> References: <477F1196.7000109@pikatech.com> <1199517763.7291.47.camel@pasglop> <47831868.3030309@pikatech.com> <4783C128.8050103@pikatech.com> <20080108130251.7ae351c7@zod.rchland.ibm.com> <20080108201314.GA29127@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Sean MacLennan List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tue, 8 Jan 2008 23:13:14 +0300 Anton Vorontsov wrote: [snip mostly valid stuff] > Yes, it's common sense and politeness to keep Signed-off-by lines > intact (and the order of these lines), but it's not strict > requirement. "Based on the patch from ..." is the equivalent of > this politeness. You took my statement slightly out of context (or I did a lousy job of explaining for this case). Basically, I _know_ that Stefan has S-o-b lines in his tree. I _know_ he did most of the work, and I _know_ he's fairly agreeable to adding his S-o-b line to patches he isn't pushing himself. So I was simply asking if Sean could get Stefan to add his S-o-b as well. At the very least a "From:" would be warranted if Sean hasn't change any code. Then authorship would still be attributed to Stefan. Yeah, it might be "politeness" but there's really no reason to be impolite when all the parties involved are in the same discussion... josh