lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Jul]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Avoid Wunused-but-set warning
From
On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 5:21 AM, Arnaud Lacombe <lacombar@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have the feeling from this thread that "Acked-by:" does not need any
> particular qualification, whereas Reviewed-by: "kinda" does. But I may
> have understood that all wrong. Btw, I say "kinda" as I see nothing in
> the Reviewed-by: or Acked-by: definition that require any
> qualification on the involved subsystem to give an Acked-by: or a
> Reviewed-by:. Maybe we [not?] need such some formal requirement.

The formal requirement for 'Reviewed-by' is that you're OK with Linus
and the gang handing your ass to you on a plate when a patch you've
blessed with your tag breaks the world. 'Acked-by' is similar in
nature but the repercussions are less severe.

Pekka


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-07-13 14:19    [W:0.047 / U:1.088 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site