From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752208Ab1GZSIP (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Jul 2011 14:08:15 -0400 Received: from lennier.cc.vt.edu ([198.82.162.213]:36299 "EHLO lennier.cc.vt.edu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751549Ab1GZSIH (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Jul 2011 14:08:07 -0400 X-Mailer: exmh version 2.7.2 01/07/2005 with nmh-1.3-dev To: Doron Cohen Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: FW: [PATCH] drivers: support new Siano tuner devices. In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 24 Jul 2011 10:39:00 +0300." From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu References: <32054.1311294764@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="==_Exmh_1311703682_2745P"; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2011 14:08:02 -0400 Message-ID: <36863.1311703682@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=steiner.cc.vt.edu X-Junkmail-Signature-Raw: score=unknown, refid=str=0001.0A020204.4E2F0283.012D,ss=1,fgs=0, ip=0.0.0.0, so=2010-07-22 22:03:31, dmn=2009-09-10 00:05:08, 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_1311703682_2745P Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 10:39:00 +0300, Doron Cohen said: > I guess the right thing is to have the copyrights to Siano since legally > - we are all signed on a contract which specifies all our code as > company property. > But if changing the copyright is an issue - we will leave it unchanged. In that case, a patch that did the following: 1) Mentioned the contract status of the code in the changelog section 2) Looked like this: -Copyright (C) 2006-2008, Uri Shkolnik, Anatoly Greenblat +Copyright (C) 2006-2011 Siano Mobile, Inc. (or whatever the company's legal name is) would be fine, I think. There's no issue with fixing the copyright statement - my comment was that *the particular change* in the patch looked odd. --==_Exmh_1311703682_2745P Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 iD4DBQFOLwKCcC3lWbTT17ARAm6hAKDlQE8Jtz84P4g8XegzLsftRd0waACXeXvS q7NYr0UIH1h+8XGvcmhvIQ== =HsW3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --==_Exmh_1311703682_2745P--