lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Jun]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [patch 1/1] document Acked-by:
    > >> +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: is often used by the maintainer of the affected code when that
    > >> +maintainer neither wrote, merged nor forwarded the patch themselves.
    > >
    > > Do we want to add verbiage saying that an Acked-By: is also useful when it
    > > comes from somebody (likely the original reporter) who has actually tested the
    > > patch?
    >
    > I'd rather see a Tested-By: for that.
    >
    > There is a difference between a maintainer ack and a tester ok.

    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.
    -
    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: 2007-06-01 12:55    [W:3.120 / U:0.308 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site