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 02:35:27 -0800
From:	Dima Zavin <dmitriyz@...gle.com>
To:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>
Cc:	"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 12:19 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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ