Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753463AbXJHT0q (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Oct 2007 15:26:46 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752223AbXJHT0i (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Oct 2007 15:26:38 -0400 Received: from fk-out-0910.google.com ([209.85.128.191]:22209 "EHLO fk-out-0910.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752544AbXJHT0h (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Oct 2007 15:26:37 -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=oLEX5gANd/jpZyh3jG00iIMcFqMRXnZdsbJPnzxYBacDlZOh+wDgdD34kVW2f5VD1tKnxk4jkneCdsofwzymw2XMMO6971Ch3eQbw/JhZU50N9GIYWlrPNKPv+klM+zdkxje3eDgsWqXDka0Z9C7ztlNsRhKnAd9DAS/Qz9N2D4= Message-ID: <7b69d1470710081226w5b6682e6q56bfa2af5ae3f017@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2007 14:26:34 -0500 From: "Scott Preece" To: "J. Bruce Fields" Subject: Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight Cc: "Stefan Richter" , "Randy Dunlap" , "Jeremy Fitzhardinge" , "Jan Engelhardt" , "Sam Ravnborg" , "Jonathan Corbet" , "Linux Kernel Mailing List" , "Pekka Enberg" In-Reply-To: <20071008185225.GK2902@fieldses.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <25555.1191864285@lwn.net> <20071008173706.GA12026@uranus.ravnborg.org> <470A708D.4080905@goop.org> <20071008110614.dd671fc7.randy.dunlap@oracle.com> <470A7847.8070502@s5r6.in-berlin.de> <20071008185225.GK2902@fieldses.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1498 Lines: 33 On 10/8/07, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > On Mon, Oct 08, 2007 at 08:34:47PM +0200, Stefan Richter wrote: ... > > So, putting a Tested-by into the changelog is only useful if the > > necessary testing is rather simple (i.e. "fixed the bug which I was > > always able to reproduce before") or if the tester is known to have > > performed rigorous and sufficiently broad tests. > > Well, you can still include those test-method details in the body of the > message in addition to adding the "Tested-by:". > > Does "Tested-by" just mean they ran some relevant test on the final > version of the patch? The really hard part is often the initial work > required to find a good reproduceable test case, capture the right error > report, or bisect to the right commit. I think that also counts as > "testing". And it'd be nice to have a tag for those sorts of > contributions, partly just as another way to ackowledge them. --- Tested-by should, at the very least, have a description of the test environment in the body (suggesting that the change compiled and ran in that environment). Preferably it should also have a description of the test or test suite run and whether that test failed on an unpatched system. scott -- scott preece - 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/