On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 07:46:41 -0800 Daniel Walker <dwalker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > This isn't what's happening tho. In maintainer land if someone forwards > you a patch then you leave the original author on the patch. They wrote > the patch and your just forwarding it on up the ladder. This isn't the > case with these patches.. I crafted each of the commit I have authorship > on, no one forwarded those commits to me. I'm not taking authorship > credit for any thing I didn't create, although I an giving credit to the > place which gave me the raw material which was Google. From my > experience this is how it's done in Linux .. I don't know why you're even trying to defend this, just admit you were wrong and move on. Trying to claim the author field for these patches for yourself is both misleading and vain. You did not write the code and are therefore not the author, trying to conflate the author and commit fields in this way is so misguided I thought you must be trolling when I first saw this thread. This is not "how it's done in Linux" at all. In this case you're trying to act like a maintainer by collecting patches and forwarding them upstream, so you need to preserve authorship and the s-o-b chain. If you want to take responsibility for the code going forward, great, but don't pollute the logs with bogus author fields that imply you wrote the stuff in the first place. -- Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
