Re: [platforms: PATCH 01/13] Marvell/Armada: Introduce platform initialization driver

[Marcin Wojtas <mw@semihalf.com>]

2017-10-11 11:14 GMT+02:00 Leif Lindholm <leif.lindholm@linaro.org>:
> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 10:43:14AM +0200, Marcin Wojtas wrote:
>> >> I think it's fairly easy thing, needlessly twisted... How does above
>> >> reflect the requirement to add contributor sign-off to someone else's
>> >> patch (with his authorship and original sign-off - should they be
>> >> removed?)?
>> >
>> > Well, we're not debating this because it's critical for this one
>> > patch, but because it would be useful to have a precedent.
>>
>> I'm totally fine with precedences, it's rather your call, whether it's
>> accepted or not :) My three arugments are:
>> - I have still a lot patches ahead and it's very likely such situation
>> may occur again.
>> - Needless to say, it may happen again in the development of other platforms.
>> - Artificially splitting patches seems to me as not really needed and
>> I'm not convinced to its justification.
>>
>> >> Anyway, let's make a quick decision here - should I submit patch with
>> >> linux-like signatures and description? Or should I split the patches?
>> >
>> > Let's put it this way - if you split the patches, you remove this
>> > series from abovementioned discussion :)
>>
>> If you're ok with it, I'd go with single patch, but I can do it either
>> way - I think I'm not to decide, what's best from maintainers' point
>> of view :)
>
> For now, I would take the single patch with Linux-style description,
> like the example I sent earlier.
>

Great, will send it in v2.

Thanks,
Marcin