From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965691AbXDWJf7 (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Apr 2007 05:35:59 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965692AbXDWJf7 (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Apr 2007 05:35:59 -0400 Received: from smtpq1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl ([213.51.146.200]:48471 "EHLO smtpq1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965691AbXDWJf6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Apr 2007 05:35:58 -0400 Message-ID: <462C7D74.60003@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 11:33:40 +0200 From: Rene Herman User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (X11/20070221) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rusty Russell CC: Alan Cox , Adrian Bunk , Marcel Holtmann , Christoph Hellwig , Linux Kernel Subject: Re: MODULE_MAINTAINER References: <46138B4C.2050409@gmail.com> <20070404123311.GA18552@infradead.org> <1175698135.5815.447.camel@violet> <20070404150231.GE27660@stusta.de> <4613C963.6070409@gmail.com> <20070404170016.453d26f1@the-village.bc.nu> <4613D492.2070404@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4613D492.2070404@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-AtHome-MailScanner-Information: Please contact support@home.nl for more information X-AtHome-MailScanner: Found to be clean Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 04/04/2007 06:38 PM, Rene Herman wrote: Rusty? > On 04/04/2007 06:00 PM, Alan Cox wrote: > >>> Given that people seem to agree that authorship information has no >>> place in the binary, that might actually be best. >> >> Authorship information is very useful in the binary, especially when you >> have to get lawyers involved in explaining things to people. > > Okay. > >>> So, MODULE_AUTHOR be gone? >> >> Not if I have anything to do with it. Putting maintainer in is not a >> bad idea but that assumes it gets maintained, the beauty of _AUTHOR >> is that it's generally right and stays that way or approximately so. > > Case in point; someone is working with me in private on a new "mitsumi" > legacy CD-ROM driver. He's authoring the actual driver and upto now I've > just been doing some peripheral module infrastructure work. Given that I > have the hardware to test the thing, I'll be the maintainer though. > > Adding myself as a MODULE_AUTHOR would be largely incorrect and adding > myself as the _only_ MODULE_AUTHOR would be so factually incorrect I > wouldn't, even if only from a credits point of view. Yet I do want to > make sure people contact me, and not the MODULE_AUTHOR (which will > happen no matter the MAINTAINERS file). > > Other cases-in-point; I've lately been rummaging through sound/isa a > bit. Nothing much copyrightable again but especially in those situations > where (some of the) original authors are no longer active, I do again > want people to contact me about them if needed. And all the "which one > of the three people listed here is maintaining this" is yet another. > > MODULE_AUTHOR may be approximately right but especially with old drivers > it also has little relation with who's maintaining the thing. > > If MODULE_AUTHOR stays, can I just have MODULE_MAINTAINER please? It > doesn't need to be added to drivers directly, it can just grow (and > being inside the code, I suppose it'll likely stay up to date better > than the MAINTAINERS file). Rene.