Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1761365AbXFQXQS (ORCPT ); Sun, 17 Jun 2007 19:16:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757752AbXFQXQK (ORCPT ); Sun, 17 Jun 2007 19:16:10 -0400 Received: from einhorn.in-berlin.de ([192.109.42.8]:51846 "EHLO einhorn.in-berlin.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752955AbXFQXQJ (ORCPT ); Sun, 17 Jun 2007 19:16:09 -0400 X-Envelope-From: stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de Message-ID: <4675C083.6080409@s5r6.in-berlin.de> Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 01:15:15 +0200 From: Stefan Richter User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.1.4) Gecko/20070609 SeaMonkey/1.1.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz CC: Andrew Morton , Adrian Bunk , Michal Piotrowski , Oleg Verych , Linus Torvalds , Andi Kleen , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Diego Calleja , Chuck Ebbert , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: How to improve the quality of the kernel? References: <200706172053.41806.bzolnier@gmail.com> <20070617115258.1f55b29d.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <200706172349.08813.bzolnier@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <200706172349.08813.bzolnier@gmail.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1854 Lines: 38 Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > despite the fact that audit takes > more time/knowledge then making the patch you will end up with zero credit > if patch turns out to be (luckily) correct. Even if you find out issues > and report them you are still on mercy of author for being credited If we introduce a "Reviewed-by" with reasonably clear semantics (different from Signed-off-by; e.g. the reviewer is not a middle-man in patch forwarding; the reviewer might have had remaining reservations... very similar to but not entirely the same as "Acked-by" as currently defined in -mm) --- and also make the already somewhat established "Tested-by" more official, --- then the maintainers could start to make it a habit to add Reviewed-by and Tested-by. Plus, reviewers and testers could formally reply with Reviewed-by and Tested-by lines to patch postings and even could explicitly ask the maintainer to add these lines. > so from personal POV you are much better to wait and fix issues after they > hit mainline kernel. You have to choose between being a good citizen and > preventing kernel regressions or being bastard and getting the credit. ;) > > If you happen to be maintainer of the affected code the choice is similar > with more pros for letting the patch in especially if you can't afford the > time to do audit (and by being maintainer you are guaranteed to be heavily > time constrained). I don't think that a maintainer (who signs off on patches after all) can easily afford to take the "bastard approach". I may be naive. -- Stefan Richter -=====-=-=== -==- =--=- http://arcgraph.de/sr/ - 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/