Pandita, Vikram wrote: > On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 12:46 AM, Gadiyar, Anand <gadiyar@xxxxxx> wrote: > > Pandita, Vikram wrote: > >> On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 11:22 PM, Gadiyar, Anand <gadiyar@xxxxxx> wrote: > <snip> > > But you can't just change authorship when the entire functional code > > is the same. (It doesn't matter much to me - I'm not as active on > > MUSB as I used to be; it's just the principle of the thing). > > Moiz fixed the second part of your patch - which was not there on your > original work: > > <snip> ... > <snip end> > > The history is: > > Original author on .35 or .32 kernel : Anand Gadiyar > Fixes done by and some more forward ports: Moiz Sonasath > Tested on 3.0 and code cleanups, commit message updates, community > comment fixes: Vikram Pandita > > Wonder if original author did not act all this while, is there > anything wrong in changing authorship with proper accreditation to > original author? > For future pushes, i would really like to learn what the linux > community suggests the right approach for such cases. > > As i said, i am open to change and will repost as decided - there is > no attempt to sabotage anyone's work here :-) Checking the git tree history and the patch you just posted, you're right. I missed Moiz's changes. (but that same git tree shows you've got my sign-off on all the internal patches Moiz posted - and I don't remember if the original debugging was done by me or not) I'm withdrawing my objection - let's just get the patch merged. It's stayed out-of-tree for far too long. - Anand -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
