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 EF97E7FE for ; Wed, 28 May 2014 18:55:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from utopia.booyaka.com (utopia.booyaka.com [74.50.51.50]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 82EE12039E for ; Wed, 28 May 2014 18:55:28 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 18:48:47 +0000 (UTC) From: Paul Walmsley To: James Bottomley In-Reply-To: <1400925225.6956.25.camel@dabdike.int.hansenpartnership.com> Message-ID: References: <1400925225.6956.25.camel@dabdike.int.hansenpartnership.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org Subject: [Ksummit-discuss] Reforming Acked-by (was Re: [TOPIC] Encouraging more reviewers) List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , 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:". - Paul