Re: [patch 1/1] document Acked-by:

From: Scott Preece
Date: Sat Jun 02 2007 - 22:58:08 EST


On 6/2/07, Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
...
+The Signed-off-by: tag implies that the signer was involved in the development
---

Change "implies" to "indicates" - it's an explicit statement, not an
implication.

---
+of the patch, or that he/she was in the patch's delivery path.
+
+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 contributed to nor forwarded the patch themselves.
---

This using plural pronouns for indefinite gender leaves one in vague
territory, but I think "themself" would be better than "themselves,
since "maintainer" is singular.

---
+
+Acked-by: is not as formal as Signed-off-by:. It is a record that the acker
+has at least reviewed the patch and has indicated acceptance. Hence patch
+mergers will sometimes manually covert an acker's "yep, looks good to me" into
---

"covert" -> "convert"

---
+an Acked-by:.
+
+Acked-by: does not necessarily indicate acknowledgement of the entire patch.
+For example, if a patch affects multiple subsystems and has an Acked-by: from
+one subsystem maintainer then this usually indicates acknowledgement of just
+the part which affects that maintainer's code. Judgement should be used here.
+When in doubt people should refer to the original discussion in the mailing
+list archives.
+
+
+14) The canonical patch format

The canonical patch subject line is:
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/