Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 15 Dec 2005 17:16:45 +0000 | From | Al Viro <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/3] m68k: compile fix - ADBREQ_RAW missing declaration |
| |
On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 01:00:05PM +0100, Roman Zippel wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, 15 Dec 2005, Al Viro wrote: > > > another compile fix, pulled straight from m68k CVS > > Thanks, but if you pull changes out of CVS could you please keep the > author intact? CVS may be bad, but it's not that bad.
CVS users, OTOH... Mon Oct 22 09:34:34 2001 UTC (4 years, 1 month ago) by zippel Branches: MAIN CVS tags: m68k-2_5_9, m68k-2_5_8, m68k-2_5_7, m68k-2_5_65, [snip] m68k-2_4_13, m68k-2_4_12 Branch point for: m68k-2_4 Diff to previous 1.1: preferred, colored Changes since revision 1.1: +1 -0 lines import Geert's 2.4.12 m68k patch
and the same for drivers/macintosh part.
So who should I put as the author? You or Geert (or whatever attributions might have been in said big patch)? Incidentally, ADBREQ_RAW had leaked into mainline (sans definition) in 2.3.45-pre2, which was Feb 13 2000, i.e. more than 1.5 year before your commit, so there's quite a chunk of history missing...
I'm serious, BTW - I certainly would have no problem preserving attribution, but it simply hadn't been there. CVS logs are only as good as the data being put there by committers... - 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/
| |