El Sat, 2 Dec 2006 21:42:13 +,
Alan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribió:
> I disagree. They can be very useful for tracking people down, and also
If their mission is to be useful, they should at least have a
"[EMAIL PROTECTED] (broken address)"
warning.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: sen
On Sat, 2 Dec 2006, Adrian Bunk wrote:
The only bits that should be made sure to remain valid are the
MODULE_AUTHOR, as Arjan also mentioned.
Even the "please contact the author" and the printk() should continue to
contain known bouncing addresses?
Ah, I forgot about that one, but I see Alan
On Sat, 2 Dec 2006 22:32:00 +0100 Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> as I explained with my email address as an example, email addresses
> aren't suitable for this.
I disagree. They can be very useful for tracking people down, and also
for finding information as the email address (old or o
On Fri, 1 Dec 2006, Jesper Juhl wrote:
In my opinion the addresses should be working ones or not present at
all (or at the very least there should be a note that the email
address is outdated).
The above argument is not valid for entries in a revision history.
Most likely (though not necessari
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 09:08:56PM +, Tigran Aivazian wrote:
> Hi Adrian,
Hi Tigran,
> I have only now had time to read your patch and reject most of it --- the
> email addresses in the revision histories etc are for historical purposes
> and as such are very useful. They are NOT meant to
Hi Adrian,
I have only now had time to read your patch and reject most of it --- the
email addresses in the revision histories etc are for historical purposes
and as such are very useful. They are NOT meant to be valid except at the
moment of time when they are written. The only purpose of ema
On 01/12/06, Hua Zhong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I am curious, what's the point?
These email addresses serve a "historical" purpose: they tell when the
contribution was made, what the author's email addresses
were at that point.
It's not MAINTAINERS. If people want to contact someone, go fin
On 12/1/06, Arjan van de Ven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, 2006-11-30 at 22:00 -0800, Hua Zhong wrote:
> I am curious, what's the point?
>
> These email addresses serve a "historical" purpose: they tell when the
contribution was made, what the author's email addresses
> were at that point.
On Fri, Dec 01, 2006 at 10:08:39AM +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-11-30 at 22:00 -0800, Hua Zhong wrote:
> > I am curious, what's the point?
> >
> > These email addresses serve a "historical" purpose: they tell when the
> > contribution was made, what the author's email addresses
> Or maybe MODULE_AUTHOR shouldn't contain the email address, if the module
> is mentioned in the MAINTAINERS which does contain it? Why repeat the data
> and so have to remember to maintain it?
MODULE_AUTHOR is actually nicer than MAINTAINERS in many ways; for
example end users can see it with
Hi Arjan,
On Fri, 1 Dec 2006, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
On Thu, 2006-11-30 at 22:00 -0800, Hua Zhong wrote:
I am curious, what's the point?
These email addresses serve a "historical" purpose: they tell when the
contribution was made, what the author's email addresses
were at that point.
..
On Thu, 2006-11-30 at 22:00 -0800, Hua Zhong wrote:
> I am curious, what's the point?
>
> These email addresses serve a "historical" purpose: they tell when the
> contribution was made, what the author's email addresses
> were at that point.
.. and which company owns the copyright.
Lets not r
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2006 at 10:00:35PM -0800, Hua Zhong wrote:
>
> > I am curious, what's the point?
>
> Email addresses are for contacting people.
Do you go back and change all the signed-off lines too when people change jobs?
> > These email addresses serve a "historical" purpose: they tell
>
On Thu, Nov 30, 2006 at 10:00:35PM -0800, Hua Zhong wrote:
> I am curious, what's the point?
Email addresses are for contacting people.
> These email addresses serve a "historical" purpose: they tell when the
> contribution was made, what the author's email addresses
> were at that point.
For
s there.
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Adrian Bunk
> Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2006 9:52 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: [2.6 patch] Tigran Aivazian: remove bouncing em
This patch removes bouncing email addresses of Tigran Aivazian from the
kernel tree.
Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
Documentation/filesystems/bfs.txt |2 +-
arch/i386/kernel/microcode.c | 28 ++--
arch/sh/kernel/kgdb_stub.c|2 +
16 matches
Mail list logo
