From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Warren Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 13:54:10 -0600 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH 13/60] ARM: tegra: sort some board file include directives In-Reply-To: <20160424102050.AD0C110028B@atlas.denx.de> References: <1461099580-3866-1-git-send-email-swarren@wwwdotorg.org> <1461099580-3866-14-git-send-email-swarren@wwwdotorg.org> <20160424102050.AD0C110028B@atlas.denx.de> Message-ID: <571E75E2.6020008@wwwdotorg.org> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On 04/24/2016 04:20 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Stephen, > > In message <1461099580-3866-14-git-send-email-swarren@wwwdotorg.org> you wrote: >> >> --- a/board/avionic-design/common/tamonten-ng.c >> +++ b/board/avionic-design/common/tamonten-ng.c >> @@ -1,18 +1,19 @@ >> /* >> * (C) Copyright 2013 >> * Avionic Design GmbH >> + * Copyright (c) 2016, NVIDIA CORPORATION. All rights reserved. >> * >> * SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ >> */ >> >> #include >> #include >> +#include >> +#include >> #include >> #include >> #include >> -#include >> #include "pinmux-config-tamonten-ng.h" >> -#include >> >> #define PMU_I2C_ADDRESS 0x2D > > Do you really think that moving around two lines of code is a big > enough creative achievement to justify adding a copyright note on it? My understanding is yes; I edited the file in a non-trival way and so NVIDIA's copyright applies to those portions. I'd consider whitespace or spelling fixes to be trivial, but not much else. I believe there is creative achievement in cleaning up the code-base this way. Of course, I'm not a lawyer and I'm sure there are plenty of lawyers who could argue either way, perhaps depending on who pays them:-) > I'm sorry, but I really dislike > the way how it - intentionally or unintentionally - appears to be > driven by the attempt to increase Nvidias presence in copyright > claims. FWIW, the purpose is to create a cleaner separate between the core Tegra SoC support code and board/driver code, to reduce their current rather tight coupling. The copyright changes are just correct application of the process of editing files; something I admit we/I've been a bit lax about in the past. > This seems not fair to me, and I would like to ask you to rework this > whole patch set and be a little less aggressive in copyright claims. I don't see what's unfair either way. As far as I'm concerned, the copyright notices are simply due to my following the process I must follow. I don't believe the presence of NVIDIA's copyright notices takes anything away from anyone else, and as I mentioned above, they seem valid to me.