From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750975AbVH2OvL (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Aug 2005 10:51:11 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751021AbVH2OvL (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Aug 2005 10:51:11 -0400 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.4]:36758 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750975AbVH2OvK (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Aug 2005 10:51:10 -0400 Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 07:50:58 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds To: "Antonino A. Daplas" cc: ncunningham@cyclades.com, Steven Rostedt , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.13 In-Reply-To: <43131AE9.7010802@gmail.com> Message-ID: References: <1125313050.5611.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1125317850.6496.7.camel@localhost> <43131AE9.7010802@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 29 Aug 2005, Antonino A. Daplas wrote: > > Both, actually, with exactly the same patch. In the long changelog, both > Steven and Paul are co-signees but only Paul's name appeared in the short > changelog. git only has one author field. That's not really technically fundamental (git could be extended to have multiple authors), but it's pretty fundamental to the work-flow, so in 99% of all cases nothing else makes sense. IOW, when I got around to applying the patch, I had two emails with the same patch to apply, and I picked Paul's explanation and added commentary about Steven doing the exact same thing in the longer log entry. I _could_ also have applied both (in different branches) and merged the two, but since that's not only about three times the work, but also against my normal workflow, and I'm lazy... Linus