Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759433Ab2HITbY (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Aug 2012 15:31:24 -0400 Received: from mail-ob0-f174.google.com ([209.85.214.174]:43172 "EHLO mail-ob0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759223Ab2HITbW (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Aug 2012 15:31:22 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <6349D7A510622448B1BA0967850A8438013692CA@NASANEXD02D.na.qualcomm.com> <1344485382.2024.9.camel@joe2Laptop> <6349D7A510622448B1BA0967850A843801369364@NASANEXD02D.na.qualcomm.com> <20120808.231804.12694947300243733.davem@davemloft.net> <6349D7A510622448B1BA0967850A8438013693DD@NASANEXD02D.na.qualcomm.com> <20120809145454.GA21195@home.goodmis.org> <1344525758.3165.8.camel@joe2Laptop> <1344526098.6935.44.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2012 12:31:01 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 7dEHIOt6ovhIGC3cwhEjyA45Is4 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: add new QCA alx ethernet driver To: Steven Rostedt Cc: Joe Perches , "Ren, Cloud" , David Miller , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , qca-linux-team , nic-devel , "Huang, Xiong" , "hao-ran.liu@canonical.com" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1538 Lines: 30 On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 12:13 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > So -- are we OK to *not* include SOBs of evolutions sent to developers > of joojoo-1 when company x submits joojoo-2 so long as those patches > were sent publicly or a record is kept somewhere ? And lets be fair, some folks *may* want their SOB passed along to the second joojoo-2, its hard to please everyone but so long as we can decide on a method -- then great, we don't have to come back to this again and then we can add this as documentation. I'm inclined to prefer to not have the small patch submitters SOB tag if their patch to joojoo-1 was public and in it they did have a SOB tag, given that in practice *a few* secondary patch submitters tend to get surprised when their SOB is added to a secondary patch submission if they only contributed a few lines. To be clear the SOB does not have anything to do with how many lines you contributed, its meaning is here: http://gerrit.googlecode.com/svn-history/r1526/documentation/2.1.2/user-signedoffby.html So even if those secondary patch submitters *think* it has to do with volume of code, perhaps its best in practice to not include them so long as we have a record of the original small patch submission publicly and with a SOB tag. Luis -- 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/