[lkml]   [2007]   [Oct]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Documentation/patch-tags v3
Trond Myklebust wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-10-11 at 23:21 +0200, Stefan Richter wrote:
>> people in the patch
>> forwarding chain should only add this tag if the reviewer sent it
>> explicitly in his response. Unlike with Acked-by and Tested-by, we must
>> not guess whether a reviewer wants to have his Reviewed-by added.
> In that case the reviewer should be made part of the forwarding chain,
> and it should be made clear to whoever is upstream that this is a patch
> that has not been modified since it was reviewed.

It's more comfortable for the reviewer to send a mail reply with the tag.

But modifications after review are a problem either way. (If the
modifications are minor, add a description below the Reviewed-by and
sign off below that additional description. If they are major, drop the
Reviewed-by. However, a follow-up patch instead of modifying the
reviewed patch should be considered and may be suitable in many cases,
since a patch which passed review should already be fine for commit on
its own.)

>> > Being sure of something and making guarantees are different things.
> To a lawyer, yes. To everyone else, no, and the GPL already tells you
> that you are given no warranties.

Stefan Richter
-=====-=-=== =-=- -=-==
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2007-10-12 00:15    [W:1.282 / U:0.324 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site