Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758245AbXIRTiN (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Sep 2007 15:38:13 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756349AbXIRTh7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Sep 2007 15:37:59 -0400 Received: from srv5.dvmed.net ([207.36.208.214]:59725 "EHLO mail.dvmed.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755543AbXIRTh6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Sep 2007 15:37:58 -0400 Message-ID: <46F02902.3040003@pobox.com> Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2007 15:37:38 -0400 From: Jeff Garzik User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.5 (X11/20070727) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Can E. Acar" CC: Theodore Tso , Claudio Jeker , Adrian Bunk , misc@openbsd.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Daniel Hazelton , Eben Moglen , Lawrence Lessig , "Bradley M. Kuhn" , Matt Norwood Subject: Re: Wasting our Freedom References: <46ED7A8F.1020304@pro-g.com.tr> <20070916195909.GA18232@stusta.de> <20070916203926.GA17863@schlund.de> <20070916211208.GC5502@thunk.org> <20070917125554.GB13179@diehard.n-r-g.com> <20070917133458.GA18360@thunk.org> <20070917192341.GB30119@diehard.n-r-g.com> <20070917204318.GE18360@thunk.org> <46EEFA6D.9080708@pro-g.com.tr> <20070917234726.GG18360@thunk.org> <46F01F21.4050009@pro-g.com.tr> In-Reply-To: <46F01F21.4050009@pro-g.com.tr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -4.4 (----) X-Spam-Report: SpamAssassin version 3.1.9 on srv5.dvmed.net summary: Content analysis details: (-4.4 points, 5.0 required) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1429 Lines: 38 Can E. Acar wrote: > As long as it is not a derived work, Reyk gets to decide who is in the > copyright. Even if it is a derived work, it is polite to ask. Additional work went in, thus additional copyrights were added. > I am really disappointed by all this. I would have expected that once > such a patch is suggested (let alone being committed to some public place) In a purely open development environment, even personal developer trees are made public. That's the way we _want_ development to occur. Out in public, with a full audit trail. Your implied ideal scenario is tantamount to guaranteeing that mistakes are never committed to a public repository anywhere. Mistakes will happen. Even legal mistakes. In public. > some senior/respected/responsible Linux person would tell them what they > are doing is wrong. Right from the start. What you are seeing is an example of mistakes that were caught in review, and corrected. That's how any scalable review process works... the developer reviews his own work. the team reviews the developer's work. the maintainer reviews the team's work. the next maintainer reviews. and so on, to the top. Jeff - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/