Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754326AbXEJJox (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 May 2007 05:44:53 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755589AbXEJJor (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 May 2007 05:44:47 -0400 Received: from an-out-0708.google.com ([209.85.132.248]:35845 "EHLO an-out-0708.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753643AbXEJJoq (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 May 2007 05:44:46 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=qS6ELFRHBcAEmeHS5iEUqlwKdY8H0/9DN5rLthmgBA2xDhvTfe+UNMn98L4yyvxorlbeZaDqFKD4DF41mQqqK/VkryrtDHIDd8yIsH0/qqmxjeKh6gfI1Z+TtxK9GZHpEn1pogPHq1azcDw5sLpBgPRnVDApyN9T3BfD5GU5YVg= Message-ID: <9a8748490705100244v58cc6ac5x1d575d177f6f62a1@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 10 May 2007 11:44:45 +0200 From: "Jesper Juhl" To: "Adrian Bunk" Subject: Re: remove broken URLs from net drivers' output Cc: "Jeff Garzik" , "Linux Kernel Mailing List" , "Linus Torvalds" , "Markus Dahms" In-Reply-To: <20070510044759.GG23574@stusta.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <200705092102.l49L2Re6028694@hera.kernel.org> <46424E12.9070307@garzik.org> <9a8748490705091604l32b0e6depbc079f69897b34e0@mail.gmail.com> <20070510040739.GF23574@stusta.de> <46429E23.6050404@garzik.org> <20070510044759.GG23574@stusta.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1579 Lines: 34 On 10/05/07, Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 12:22:59AM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote: > > Adrian Bunk wrote: > >> I thought it was just an informal tag to mark which people did agree with > >> the patch (and the line between your "Makes good sense to me." and a "Feel > >> free to add my ACK to this" is really thin). > > > > No, the line is easy and obvious: if there is any doubt, DO NOT ASSUME. > > > > If they do not explicitly ACK it, then do not presume to speak for them. > > There is no doubt that Jesper did explicitly ACK the patch. > We are ONLY discussing whether his informal ACK can be translated into > an "Acked-by:" line. > Right. The patch is fine. What I said when I commented on it was an ACK, that's not being debated. I just thought that Acked-by: was considered a lot more formal and was surprised to see that line with my name on the patch. But I've since checked up on that assumption and I can't find anything that states that it is considered as formal as I thought it was, so the mistake is all mine and what you did is fine. If Acked-by: should be made more formal or not is a different discussion. -- Jesper Juhl Don't top-post http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/top-post.html Plain text mails only, please http://www.expita.com/nomime.html - 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/