Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 1 Jun 2007 14:37:54 -0500 | From | "Scott Preece" <> | Subject | Re: [patch 1/1] document Acked-by: |
| |
On 6/1/07, Krzysztof Halasa <khc@pm.waw.pl> wrote: > "John Anthony Kazos Jr." <jakj@j-a-k-j.com> writes: > > > Indeed. Acked-by: implies authority, and only very few people should be > > able to do it. Namely, the only person who can ACK a patch is a person who > > could also NACK a patch and expect it to actually be dropped. If I think a > > patch is bad, I can say so, but as I have no authority, my statement would > > be taken on merit alone, whereas Linus or Andrew or such could just NACK > > it and move on without having to spew a blurb every time. > > Everyone always has some authority so everyone can ack or nack any > patch and I hope the action taken will always depend on merit > rather than person, especially if it's a technical issue and not > some style etc. thing. > -- > Krzysztof Halasa ---
This is a question worth answering - is it rude to ack/nak a patch if you're not a maintainer or otherwise known-to-be-trusted, or is it OK for anyone to express an opinion? Andrew's patch text seems to imply that it's generally OK.
scott - 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/
| |