On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 1:05 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: Just in case you didn't read the ugly thread fully, let me clarify a few points. > That, to me, means that Samsung hold the copyrights, and Jaswinder Singh > was the author of it. Jaswinder has no copyright on the code. Exactly what I've been saying. > Note that Boojin has contributed more lines of code than Javi. > More lines of code, yes. Note 0 contribution to the engine of pl330. OTOH seeing the intricate fixes that Javi submitted to the core, is impressive. Being the author of code, I sense Javi has far better understanding of PL330 and the driver. > What would be fair is to add the first _two_ lines indicating that > Samsung maintains the copyright to 2012. > OK, but that may not be scalable considering next year too someone could want to update the copyright to 2013 and so on. So I suggested simply change 2010 to 2010-2012 in the existing notice. > However, it would *not* be unreasonable to add Boojin Kim to > drivers/dma/pl330.c as a separate patch _before_ or _after_ this patch, > and I think that would be more warranted than adding Javi Merino as an > author based on the above stats. > Based on the LOC stats, maybe. But not on the quality of patches. I say let's add Javi and Boojin both. >> Kukjin thinks merging two files is a serious enough change to >> warrant co-authorship, which I disagree. > > Get a clue. Reading the patch. Kukjin isn't claiming co-authorship. > Boojin is. Different person. > I meant Kukjin is defending co-ownership of Boojin on the basis of this merge. >> I am equally pissed off by the fact that Kukjin/Boojin sneaked in the >> co-authorship in this revision while carrying over the Acked-by's from >> previous revision as if it has already been approved by others. > >Go and check the file history, and you'll see it's justified. > Actually I know more than the history of file. I have worked with Boojin. > Rubbish. It does make sense, because it's saying where the changes > came from. That's done quite often when moving code around. > > You could say that moving code from file A to file B and commenting > that it came from file A makes no sense because the code is no longer > in file A. Well, that's definitely the case, but that doesn't mean > you don't credit where it came from in the first place. > Btw _every_ file involved in the merger is authored by me, so we are not at the risk of wiping out credit log of someone's contribution. Anyways, I think I can live with that piece of history stuck to the file forever. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
 |