Kernel contributions from organisations and individual privacy

[Jason Ball]

I had a similar situation and managed to route patches via an intermediary
to protect my employers anonymity at the time.   You may (should) be able
to find an appropriate sponsor depending on the nature of the
customisations.



On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 7:19 PM, Chris Packham <judge.packham at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> This came up at work today and I'm not sure where the best place to
> ask is. I almost went straight to the lkml but I figured I'd start
> with newbies first.
>
> We've been using the Linux kernel in our products for a number of
> years now. We're doing all the right things w.r.t GPL compliance but
> we're not actively pushing that much upstream. This means we're
> effectively maintaining our own Linux fork with very few resources.
> I'm trying to avoid this by encouraging developers to get their
> changes upstreamed.
>
> This is good for our organisation because we don't have to re-do our
> changes when we need to take a new kernel version. Most developers see
> this as a good career building for them. But some developers value
> their individual privacy over career progression.
>
> My initial response to that was well we can just make a dummy gmail
> account or even setup a swdept@$organisation shared address. But
> SubmittingPatches actually says to sign patches with your real name
> not a pseudonym.
>
> Does this basically mean people that value privacy are unable to
> contribute?
>
> Thanks,
> Chris
>
> _______________________________________________
> Kernelnewbies mailing list
> Kernelnewbies at kernelnewbies.org
> http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
>



-- 
--
Teach your kids Science, or somebody else will :/

jason at ball.net
vk2vjb at google.com <vk2flnx at google.com>
callsign: vk2vjb
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/pipermail/kernelnewbies/attachments/20150611/20eed147/attachment.html