Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 7 Nov 2007 00:26:51 +0100 | From | Adrian Bunk <> | Subject | Re: Patch tags [was writeout stalls in current -git] |
| |
On Tue, Nov 06, 2007 at 09:25:12AM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > Andrew wrote: > > > > Reviewed-by: Fengguang Wu <wfg@mail.ustc.edu.cn> > > > > I would prefer Tested-by: :( > > This seems like as good an opportunity as any to toss my patch tags > document out there one more time. I still think it's a good idea to > codify some sort of consensus on what these tags mean...
What's missing is a definition which of them are formal tags that must be explicitely given (look at point 13 in SubmittingPatches).
Signed-off-by: and Reviewed-by: are the formal tags someone must have explicitely given and that correspond to some statement.
OTOH, I can translate a "sounds fine" or "works for me" someone else gave me into an Acked-by: resp. Tested-by: tag.
> jon >... > --- /dev/null > +++ b/Documentation/patch-tags > @@ -0,0 +1,76 @@ > +Patches headed for the mainline may contain a variety of tags documenting > +who played a hand in (or was at least aware of) their progress. All of > +these tags have the form: > + > + Something-done-by: Full name <email@address> [optional random stuff] > + > +These tags are: > + > +From: The original author of the patch. This tag will ensure > + that credit is properly given when somebody other than the > + original author submits the patch. > + > +Signed-off-by: A person adding a Signed-off-by tag is attesting that the > + patch is, to the best of his or her knowledge, legally able > + to be merged into the mainline and distributed under the > + terms of the GNU General Public License, version 2. See > + the Developer's Certificate of Origin, found in > + Documentation/SubmittingPatches, for the precise meaning of > + Signed-off-by. This tag assures upstream maintainers that > + the provenance of the patch is known and allows the origin > + of the patch to be reviewed should copyright questions > + arise. > + > +Acked-by: The person named (who should be an active developer in the > + area addressed by the patch) is aware of the patch and has > + no objection to its inclusion; it informs upstream > + maintainers that a certain degree of consensus on the patch > + as been achieved.. An Acked-by tag does not imply any > + involvement in the development of the patch or that a > + detailed review was done. > + > +Reviewed-by: The patch has been reviewed and found acceptable according > + to the Reviewer's Statement as found at the bottom of this > + file. A Reviewed-by tag is a statement of opinion that the > + patch is an appropriate modification of the kernel without > + any remaining serious technical issues. Any interested > + reviewer (who has done the work) can offer a Reviewed-by > + tag for a patch. This tag serves to give credit to > + reviewers and to inform maintainers of the degree of review > + which has been done on the patch. > + > +Cc: The person named was given the opportunity to comment on > + the patch. This is the only tag which might be added > + without an explicit action by the person it names. This > + tag documents that potentially interested parties have been > + included in the discussion. > + > +Tested-by: The patch has been successfully tested (in some > + environment) by the person named. This tag informs > + maintainers that some testing has been performed, provides > + a means to locate testers for future patches, and ensures > + credit for the testers. > + > + > +---- > + > +Reviewer's statement of oversight, v0.02 > + > +By offering my Reviewed-by: tag, I state that: > + > + (a) I have carried out a technical review of this patch to evaluate its > + appropriateness and readiness for inclusion into the mainline kernel. > + > + (b) Any problems, concerns, or questions relating to the patch have been > + communicated back to the submitter. I am satisfied with the > + submitter's response to my comments. > + > + (c) While there may be things that could be improved with this submission, > + I believe that it is, at this time, (1) a worthwhile modification to > + the kernel, and (2) free of known issues which would argue against its > + inclusion. > + > + (d) While I have reviewed the patch and believe it to be sound, I do not > + (unless explicitly stated elsewhere) make any warranties or guarantees > + that it will achieve its stated purpose or function properly in any > + given situation.
cu Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
- 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/
| |