lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Jun]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [patch 1/1] document Acked-by:
    > > > >  > Explain what we use Acked-by: for, and how it differs from Signed-off-by:
    > > > > > Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
    > > > > > +
    > > > > > +If a person was not directly involved in the preparation or handling of a
    > > > > > +patch but wishes to signify and record their approval of it then they can
    > > > > > +arrange to have an Acked-by: line added to the patch's changelog.
    > > > >
    > > > > Acked-by: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>
    > > >
    > > > What, no Tested-by: ?
    > >
    > >Heh. Indeed. I think there's room for both fwiw.
    >
    > Too verbose. Suggest a typedef.
    >
    > Signed-off-and-tested-by: Foo J. Bar <addy@corps>

    Signed-off-by: should imply Tested-by:, with the exception of the final
    Signed-off-by: when it's merged into a tree. Tested-by:, if it really is
    necessary or useful, should be reserved for only those who test something
    but weren't involved in its development. Adding it to the tag is
    unnecessary unless somebody thinks there's a serious problem with untested
    patches being introduced by first-hand maintainers that a forced reminder
    would remedy.
    -
    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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2007-06-02 20:03    [W:0.023 / U:32.008 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site