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]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.0.999.0709201310230.16478@woody.linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Thu, 20 Sep 2007 13:15:05 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>
cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Wolfgang Walter <wolfgang.walter@...dentenwerk.mhn.de>,
	Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>, Trond Myklebust <trond@...app.com>,
	stable@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rpc: fix garbage in printk in svc_tcp_accept()



On Thu, 20 Sep 2007, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>
> we upgraded the kernel of a nfs-server from 2.6.17.11 to 2.6.22.6. Since
> then we get the message
...

Bruce - you're losing authorship information.

Please don't do that.

Put a 

	From: Wolfgang Walter <wolfgang.walter@...dentenwerk.mhn.de>

at the top of the email, so that the author gets properly attributed. I 
don't know how many of these I've missed - in this case I just ended up 
googling for the commit message because the "Signed-off-by:" lines implied 
that you weren't the original author, and see the real patch authorship 
that way.

But it's *not* the case that the first sign-off is always the author, and 
I don't want to need to google for each patch I get, so please make it a 
habit to make sure that there's proper attribution for the patches.

Some people (read: Andrew) go so far as to *always* do it (ie Andrew puts 
a "From: Andrew Morton .." at the heads of the emails he sends out), and I 
appreciate it. That way, even if the email then gets forwarded by somebody 
else (because Andrew sent it to some submaintainer instead of me), the 
original authorship doesn't get lost when somebody else then forwards the 
email.

So that "always explicitly say who the author is" is a good idea, but when 
forwarding somebody elses patch, it's *more* than a good idea - at that 
point it's absolutely required for proper attribution.

		Linus
-
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ