From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754259Ab2C0QVJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Mar 2012 12:21:09 -0400 Received: from lennier.cc.vt.edu ([198.82.162.213]:44003 "EHLO lennier.cc.vt.edu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750796Ab2C0QVG (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Mar 2012 12:21:06 -0400 X-Mailer: exmh version 2.7.2 01/07/2005 with nmh-1.4-dev To: Matthew Garrett Cc: Andrew Morton , "H. Peter Anvin" , Daniel Drake , mingo@redhat.com, tglx@linutronix.de, x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dilinger@queued.net, pgf@laptop.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] x86, olpc: add debugfs interface for EC commands In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 27 Mar 2012 17:07:14 +0100." <20120327160714.GA8398@srcf.ucam.org> From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu References: <20120326180710.8DF9C9D401E@zog.reactivated.net> <20120326142908.c5248aec.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <4F70E042.4020703@zytor.com> <20120326145146.23fde0db.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20120327160714.GA8398@srcf.ucam.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="==_Exmh_1332865125_1966P"; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 12:18:46 -0400 Message-ID: <22573.1332865126@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> X-Mirapoint-Received-SPF: 198.82.161.152 auth3.smtp.vt.edu Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu 2 pass X-Junkmail-Status: score=10/50, host=zidane.cc.vt.edu X-Junkmail-Signature-Raw: score=unknown, refid=str=0001.0A020202.4F71E867.00AB,ss=1,re=0.000,fgs=0, ip=0.0.0.0, so=2011-07-25 19:15:43, dmn=2011-05-27 18:58:46, mode=single engine X-Junkmail-IWF: false Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --==_Exmh_1332865125_1966P Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Tue, 27 Mar 2012 17:07:14 +0100, Matthew Garrett said: > If a previous author has given a Signed-off-by then they've clearly > indicated that their code is under an appropriate license and may be > submitted to the kernel. If someone else then takes that code, modifies > it and submits it then there's no obvious reason why we still need the > original Signed-off-by. Giving credit to the original author is > obviously appropriate, but I don't see why we need any more than that. Conversely, if a maintainer does fixups on a patch while commiting it, we *don't* discard the original Signed-off-by. I'd say if somebody's submitting somebody else's patch, the chain should be: signed-off-by: original author signed-off-by: the person who did the updates signed-off-by: --==_Exmh_1332865125_1966P Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 iQIVAwUBT3HoZQdmEQWDXROgAQKvuA//UwBhCHoX6oj48o3CYIiVsJxEuJZkbk1W w8qXSZvNol18GB+vtHl+ajCxU0zAjNiWzV1aUIrZPZ2JZMWzLTLyFG43vFF3E2cS ppxzYMqH7pRCej6GxE45x5u/4GEL0hYtXNn3HdBrTSy+hzwDsykPW5jlvvOUaLvd LM+Z7N2JrxerUAWpOC322OHgwqIadgA0PmOVRvu3nf8E43aoQY+iiKK6CI0QwyEL cRfvcA7Q3jbJTc9yqZGyEFuLQIGRjQ/AbJRY9fkuYt8hmxc0cCXjwPYzGA9obXR7 7wjrfq9/jAFJ8xKwkBN41Aoy49Mp3YDO7Zraw2oW6dnHFmGQnaSyijpemp2IkmOa 1rlKww+M/raK2I0JI8x5M3sOUbCF2Puww5/ZZp1IkYlbho6eXUM2jhMIIf26oLKY 3eXE63LXnP7BBVp+crcBjamTALu4aGse546Zi5mpK5bH9IKFBglF5YSOAOLsNHd0 vsmVe4jm3opu/cu94SORb28GYCuP8G1pLM8PkRn1Q8hvTnhi7ZFri3oImQofwZSa sUBBY0W25bjJ/QyNK9SgVMLKNJe0SDphmTetz8+AbAZHqyBZoDhQd+2vzfUOpOKi HfMmnFFTlDZcxXevuSZcKadNxF0lLY4rMNFuMESQ+DxlsjZtpxOb5muo0DKmar42 X5M0qe2DIl8= =Vwzo -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --==_Exmh_1332865125_1966P--