[PATCH] ehci-hcd: remove useless timeout

Antony Pavlov antonynpavlov at gmail.com
Sat Mar 5 01:15:04 PST 2016

On Sat, 05 Mar 2016 03:04:06 +0300
Aleksey Kuleshov <rndfax at yandex.ru> wrote:

> >>  Was it so necessary?
> >
> > Yes.
> >>  Does Barebox really need this?
> >
> > Yes.
> Oh, these are exhaustive answers, thank you :)
> >>  Or it's just blindly following the rules made by Linux project?
> >
> > It's irrelevant if BB follows this practice blindly, or with extensive
> > knowledge and understanding of all factors involved if the procedure
> > involved is believed to be legally sound
> >
> >>  Do really small projects need to follow all such bureaucratic way rather than
> >>  just growing up?
> >
> > Yes, project with identical licensing, regardless of their size, need
> > to adhere to certain legal procedures in order to have a good case if
> > they are ever in court.
> So this means that every GPL'ed hello-world.c project should follow
> Linux's rules "to have a good case if they are ever in court"?
> And If think in this way then Barebox should create a Barebox Foundation,
> hire a lawyer and wait until someone will sue them. But this is ridiculous, because
> Barebox don't need this! That's why there is no Barebox Foundation with lawyer.
> >>  What if git history magically disappears? Only authors written in files will be fixed,
> >>  but all authors of patches will disappear as well. So this SOB field is only
> >>  valid while "git log" gives you something to read.
> >
> > I don't understand the point you are trying to make.
> SOB is just a matter of "git log".
> >>  But that's for Linux - companies, billions of dollars... What about Barebox?
> > Same license, same rules.
> (see about GPL'ed hello-world.c)
> > Aleksey, I am not really interested in continuing this discussion or
> > trying to convince you to add SOB to your patch, so if any of the
> > above explanations are insufficient for you, I am afraid we are going
> > to have to agree to disagree on this subject.
> I asked a simple question - still no use case of SOB in Barebox.

Of course there is a use case for SOB in Barebox!

Git has the 'Author' placeholder only for one person.
If more that one person works on a patch
then we can't put all their names into the 'Author' field.
However we can use SOB to indicated co-authoring.

Best regards,
  Antony Pavlov

More information about the barebox mailing list