Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 8 Dec 2005 09:28:08 +0200 (EET) | From | Pekka J Enberg <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] ext3: return FSID for statvfs |
| |
On Wed, 7 Dec 2005, Andreas Dilger wrote: > Question - what is rule for "Signed-off-by:"? I'm hesitant to add that if > I haven't actually compiled+tested a fix, as I've seen too many instances > of "obvious fix contains bug" to believe visual inspection is enough. If > "Signed-off-by:" simply indicates "Yes, this person approves of the change > in principle" then that's OK by me. Andrew, do you use the "CC" tag for > that?
I think signed-off is only used when you either (1) change the patch or (2) pass it forward. I have seen people use "Acked-by:" for what you seem to want to do here.
FWIW, I have tested the patch with UML.
Pekka - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |