Hi James,
On 11.03.2017 12:52, James wrote:
Hi Felix,
Not 'hijacking' a patch, just following Linux Developer's Certificate of Origin 1.1 guidelines.
As you know, I contacted you directly with this patch suggestion prior to posting to the mailing list (keeping strictly to rule c). I had hoped you would make a new version:
See following remark please.
On 09.03.2017 08:53, James Balean wrote:
Did you want to test/submit this?
Perhaps I misinterpreted your response, which stated:
My answer to the question above was: 'If required I will fix and test things myself. I will then post the next version of the patch ASAP, for a further review of course.' Please quote completely and correctly.
On Fri, 10 Mar 2017 at 04:13, Felix Brack <fb@ltec.ch mailto:fb@ltec.ch> wrote:
This and probably more has to be accessible by _all_ mailing list
subscribers. Please post there.
This was confusing, as I could see no way to convert this work to a patch of your unapproved v2 patch (being new to this process).
Okay, maybe that was a bad formulation, sorry, I will try to rephrase. Consider this to be my point of view rather then a rule being carved in stone. The patch originator posts the patch (this starts a new thread). Now the probably most important part of the process starts: everyone is invited to comment on the patch _within the newly started thread_. This will make sure that the thread started by posting the patch contains all information that would probably lead to further versions of that patch. Also this will make sure that everyone interested will be able to follow the entire discussion. These comments (your's too, of course) are extremely appreciated - the more eyes looking at a patch, the better. Whenever possible comments should also contain concrete suggestions about how to do better as well as a little explanation about why to do so (imho). After a more or less extensive process of commenting and resubmitting of the patch the responsible custodian may finally pick it up to be added to the U-Boot repository.
On Sat, 11 Mar 2017 at 00:07, Felix Brack <fb@ltec.ch mailto:fb@ltec.ch> wrote:
Remove this "Signed-off-by" tag as I neither made nor tested these
modifications.
My understanding from the 'submitting patches' guide is that the square bracket nomenclature I used indicates minor changes to an existing patch, thereby providing you with credit whilst also denoting that you do not endorse the changes.
What if I fix a
bug in my v2 patch? Should I then increase from v2 to v4?
Perhaps someone can clarify, but it seems logical that the version number is in order of contribution to the project, rather than being tied to any specific user. Especially given the software license it is under.
Kind regards, James Balean
Regards, Felix