From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756738AbYFLWIk (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Jun 2008 18:08:40 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752546AbYFLWIa (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Jun 2008 18:08:30 -0400 Received: from srv5.dvmed.net ([207.36.208.214]:58091 "EHLO mail.dvmed.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751797AbYFLWI3 (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Jun 2008 18:08:29 -0400 Message-ID: <48519E57.3030906@garzik.org> Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 18:08:23 -0400 From: Jeff Garzik User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (X11/20080501) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: David Miller CC: sfr@canb.auug.org.au, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [git patches] net driver updates for .27 References: <20080612023046.GA25958@havoc.gtf.org> <20080612133842.0dc472bc.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20080611.212929.71729484.davem@davemloft.net> In-Reply-To: <20080611.212929.71729484.davem@davemloft.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -4.4 (----) X-Spam-Report: SpamAssassin version 3.2.4 on srv5.dvmed.net summary: Content analysis details: (-4.4 points, 5.0 required) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org David Miller wrote: > From: Stephen Rothwell > Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 13:38:42 +1000 > >> Hi Jeff, >> >> On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 22:30:46 -0400 Jeff Garzik wrote: >>> Stephen Rothwell (1): >>> [netdrvr] Fix 8390 build breakage >> That patch is actually from Tony Breeds .. > > Jeff, there is still time to fix this. If you want, just > fix up that patch in your tree to get the attribution > and author field correct, and send me a new pull request. Did you actually read the commit description? It's quite clear who originated the commit: commit 0c1aa20fb87b796d904f4d89ad12e5a0c483127b Author: Stephen Rothwell Date: Thu May 29 22:39:28 2008 +1000 [netdrvr] Fix 8390 build breakage From: tony@bakeyournoodle.com (Tony Breeds) ... Signed-off-by: Tony Breeds Signed-off-by: Jeff Garzik It's pretty hard to miss, and it accurately captures the entire audit trail: 1) who sent the patch? 2) who wrote the patch? 3) who committed the patch? So, you want to eliminate part of that audit trail (#1), making the commit audit trail more hidden and opaque? I respectfully disagree. We should capture the _entire_ audit trail, not hide bits of it. Full credit is given, as you can see from looking at the commit. Jeff