Message-ID: <470A7C91.3010503@s5r6.in-berlin.de>
Date: Mon, 08 Oct 2007 20:53:05 +0200
From: Stefan Richter <stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.1.6) Gecko/20070807 SeaMonkey/1.1.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: mgross@linux.intel.com
CC: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
References: <25555.1191864285@lwn.net> <20071008184029.GA31906@linux.intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <20071008184029.GA31906@linux.intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1255
Lines: 27

Mark Gross wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 08, 2007 at 11:24:45AM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
>>  (a) I have carried out a technical review of this patch to evaluate its
>>      appropriateness and readiness for inclusion into the mainline kernel. 
[...]
>>  (c) While there may (or may not) be things which could be improved with
>>      this submission, I believe that it is, at this time, (1) a
>>      worthwhile addition to the kernel, and (2) free of serious known
>>      issues which would argue against its inclusion.
> 
> C-1 "worthwhile addition..." Probably shouldn't be part of this.  That's
> what additional Signed off by ACK's provide.  I think reviewed by should
> limit its scope to code correctness leaving the subjective "worthwhile"
> statements are better expressed with other tags.

A patch which is not "worthwhile" is also not "appropriate".  Mere
correctness in a mathematical sense is not enough as technical review
criterion.
-- 
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/