Message-ID: <465FB862.207@zytor.com>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 23:10:42 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (X11/20070419)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
CC: akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 1/1] document Acked-by:
References: <200706010209.l51299kN000531@shell0.pdx.osdl.net> <28278.1180675923@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
In-Reply-To: <28278.1180675923@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1008
Lines: 24

Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
> On Thu, 31 May 2007 19:09:10 PDT, akpm@linux-foundation.org said:
> 
>> +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.

	-hpa
-
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/