On Fri, 2011-01-21 at 09:48 -0800, Jesse Barnes wrote: > 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. I did create these commits. Do you think someone else created the commits? There is no commit forwarding happening here. Daniel -- Sent by an consultant of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum. -- 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
