linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/7] Nexus One Support

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 22 Jan 2011 12:45:42 +0200
From:	Anca Emanuel <anca.emanuel@...il.com>
To:	Dima Zavin <dmitriyz@...gle.com>
Cc:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>, "Ted Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
	Daniel Walker <dwalker@...eaurora.org>,
	Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>,
	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	davidb@...eaurora.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] Nexus One Support

On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 12:35 PM, Dima Zavin <dmitriyz@...gle.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 12:19 AM, Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org> wrote:
>> Hi Ted,
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 10:49 PM, Daniel Walker <dwalker@...eaurora.org> wrote:
>>> > > I'll add this list into the commit text ..
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 11:05:54PM +0200, Pekka Enberg wrote:
>>> > So why is everyone bitching at Daniel when he's doing something the
>>> > Android folks should have done themselves a long time ago?
>>
>> On Fri, 2011-01-21 at 18:49 -0500, Ted Ts'o wrote:
>>> Two wrongs don't make a right.  And it's not like not submitting
>>> changes is wrong, although granted it's not ideal.  (I'd say removing
>>> attribution from a git commit is even worse.  If you're doing the
>>> equivalent of a cherry pick, you should preserve the Author field.
>>> Even if you're doing some cleanup work, as the maintainer I generally
>>> preserve the Author line, and will simply add the fact that I did some
>>> cleanup to the commit body.  The question is who did more work; the
>>> person who originally submitted the code, or the person who did the
>>> cleanup.)
>>
>> Sure, it would have been nicer for everyone involved if Daniel would
>> have kept the original patches and added new patches to clean it up on
>> top of that to preserve the history. However, I don't understand the
>> harsh comments when this looks like a honest mistake! And I especially
>> don't understand the almost hostile attitude of the Android developers
>
> There's absolutely no hostility. I stated from the very beginning that
> I appreciate the voluntary effort by a 3rd party to upstream the board
> files. I only asked that proper authorship be attributed, which is
> standard linux kernel patch submission procedure when the committer
> did not originate the code.
>
>> who have been sitting on these patches for over a year now AFAICT.
>
> Even if that were true, that does not somehow revoke the original
> author/contributor list.
>
> --Dima
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>

Can you show how to import history ? Until then, a line like From:
x@y.x I think will be fine.
And maybe an link to https://review.source.android.com/'some review'
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/