Re: [PATCH 2/3] m68k: compile fix - ADBREQ_RAW missing declaration

[Al Viro]

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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/