At Sun, 10 Oct 2010 14:04:34 -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 08, 2010 at 09:31:30PM +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote: > > At Fri, 8 Oct 2010 11:04:01 -0700, > > Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > > > > > So I do believe we need to have Takashi's SOB at the very least and maybe > > > credit him as the author of the patches. > > > > I sent my original one, so this should suffice, right? > > > > Takashi, > > Generally I think people should not add or remove any SOB lines except > for their own as the work on the patches, so original patches should > retain their original SOBs... In absence of that I'd like to have > explicit confirmations that I can add SOBs statements; otherwise it just > dilutes the value of SOBs significantly. Yeah, in general, sign-offs should be retained. In this particular case, it's also my (well more exactly my employer's) fault, that blocked the submission of the original patch. In anyway, feel free to add my sign-off there since I already posted my own one as a reference. But, I have an open issue with Chase's patch. Maybe it's rather a question to Henrik: Shouldn't all points be reported as ABS_MT_* events? So far, only the second touch-point is reported via ABS_MT_* while the first point is still reported as ABX_[X|Y]. I corrected this in my patch I posted, but I wasn't sure, too. thanks, Takashi -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
