Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S266793AbUJAVrk (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Oct 2004 17:47:40 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S266631AbUJAVPl (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Oct 2004 17:15:41 -0400 Received: from fw.osdl.org ([65.172.181.6]:53678 "EHLO mail.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S266517AbUJAUwN (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Oct 2004 16:52:13 -0400 Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 13:51:39 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds To: Paul Jackson cc: haveblue@us.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Loops in the Signed-off-by process In-Reply-To: <20041001134017.3f1c6d62.pj@sgi.com> Message-ID: References: <1096658717.3684.980.camel@localhost> <20041001134017.3f1c6d62.pj@sgi.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 952 Lines: 27 On Fri, 1 Oct 2004, Paul Jackson wrote: > > The protocol for adding an Acked-by line mystifies me a little. > > If I submit a patch after having a good discussion of it with > Joe Blow, is it appropriate for me to add an Acked-by line for > Joe on my own, or should I get his consent (or know him well > enough to know he consents) or should I only so add if Joe > asks me to? The "acked-by" thing doesn't mean anything, so you should just use your own judgement. > In other words, does the presence of such a line commit Joe > to any position on the patch, beyond perhaps not being too > annoyed if he gets queries on it. Nope. The annoyance factor is the only factor to take into account. Linus - 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/