From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6498F82D for ; Thu, 29 May 2014 15:58:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.zytor.com (terminus.zytor.com [198.137.202.10]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1CEC41FA28 for ; Thu, 29 May 2014 15:58:57 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <53875932.1030604@zytor.com> Date: Thu, 29 May 2014 08:58:42 -0700 From: "H. Peter Anvin" MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Paul Walmsley , James Bottomley References: <1400925225.6956.25.camel@dabdike.int.hansenpartnership.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] Reforming Acked-by (was Re: [TOPIC] Encouraging more reviewers) List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On 05/28/2014 11:48 AM, Paul Walmsley wrote: > > Also long-overdue is a clarification on exactly what "Acked-by" means. > Right now it is being used for at least two distinct and > mutually-incompatible purposes: > > 1. A maintainer A for code affected by a patch, who is distinct from a > maintainer B queuing a patch, has reviewed the patch and has cleared it as > being OK for maintainer B to send upstream > > 2. A casual review has been done by someone who is not a maintainer for > the code in question > > What I would propose is to have the first use replaced by a new tag, > "Maintainer-acked-by:", and the second use abolished, along with > "Acked-by:", and replaced by "Reviewed-by:". > The distinction is on the right side of the colon. It's a matter of reputation. -hpa