Re: acked-by meaning

[Randy Dunlap]

On 11/13/2012 02:12 PM, Frank Rowand wrote:

> On 11/11/12 19:47, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>> On 11/11/2012 05:40 PM, Thiago Farina wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> What is the meaning of 'Acked-by:' line? Is the same of LGTM? How it
>>> differs from 'Reviewed-by:'?
>>
> 
>> Reviewed-by: is stronger than Acked-by:.
>> If someone replies with Reviewed-by, they also accept some
>> responsibility for fixing any problems that the patch might
>> introduce after it is merged.
> 
> I haven't found a "responsibility for fixing any problems" in the
> references provided below.  Can you help me out by pointing
> to a specific sentence or another reference?

Nope, I just recall it from the mailing list discussions
several years ago.

>> Acked-by just means agreement with the patch.
>>
>>> If someone acks a patch (can anybody acks or just the maintainer?),
>>> does it mean that he will also apply the patch to his tree?
>>
>>
>> Anybody can reply to a patch with Acked-by.
>> No, it doesn't mean that the replying/acking person will apply
>> the patch to any tree.
>>
>>
>> Have you read what Documentation/SubmittingPatches and
>> Documentation/development-process/5.Posting and 6.Followthrough
>> say about Acked-by?
> 
> Thanks...
> 
> -Frank
> 



-- 
~Randy
--
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/