login
Login
/
Register
Search
Forums
News
Blogs
Features
Site
Home
»
Mailing list archives
»
linux-kernel
»
2007
»
October
»
8
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
view
thread
!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [
thread
] [
date
] [
author
]
Next message: [
thread
] [
date
] [
author
]
[view in full thread]
From:
Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...>
To: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@...>
Cc: Sam Ravnborg <sam@...>, <linux-kernel@...>
Subject:
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
Date: Monday, October 8, 2007 - 7:06 pm
On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 16:43:10 -0600 Jonathan Corbet wrote:
quoted text
> Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org> wrote: > > > Or maybe we need something much less formal that explain the purpose of the > > four tags we use: > > ...or maybe a combination? How does the following patch look as a way > to describe how the tags are used and what Reviewed-by, in particular, > means? > > Perhaps the DCO should move to this file as well? > > jon
Just typos noted below...
quoted text
> --- > > Add a document on patch tags. > > Signed-off-by: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net> > > diff --git a/Documentation/00-INDEX b/Documentation/00-INDEX > index 43e89b1..fa1518b 100644 > --- a/Documentation/00-INDEX > +++ b/Documentation/00-INDEX > @@ -284,6 +284,8 @@ parport.txt > - how to use the parallel-port driver. > parport-lowlevel.txt > - description and usage of the low level parallel port functions. > +patch-tags > + - description of the tags which can be added to patches > pci-error-recovery.txt > - info on PCI error recovery. > pci.txt > diff --git a/Documentation/patch-tags b/Documentation/patch-tags > new file mode 100644 > index 0000000..fb5f8e1 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/Documentation/patch-tags > @@ -0,0 +1,66 @@ > +Patches headed for the mainline may contain a variety of tags documenting > +who played a hand in (or was at least aware of) its progress. All of these > +tags have the form: > + > + Something-done-by: Full name <email@address> > + > +These tags are: > + > +Signed-off-by: A person adding a Signed-off-by tag is attesting that the > + patch is, to the best of his or her knowledge, legally able > + to be merged into the mainline and distributed under the > + terms of the GNU General Public License, version 2. See > + the Developer's Certificate of Origin, found in > + Documentation/SubmittingPatches, for the precise meaning of > + Signed-off-by. > + > +Acked-by: The person named (who should be an active developer in the > + area addressed by the patch) is aware of the patch and has > + no objection to its inclusion. An Acked-by tag does not > + imply any involvement in the development of the patch or > + that a detailed review was done. > + > +Reviewed-by: The patch has been reviewed and found acceptible according
acceptable
quoted text
> + to the Reviewer's Statement as found at the bottom of this > + file. A Reviewed-by tag is a statement of opinion that the > + patch is an appropriate modification of the kernel without > + any remaining serious technical issues. Any interested > + reviewer (who has done the work) can offer a Reviewed-by > + tag for a patch. > + > +Cc: The person named was given the opportunity to comment on > + the patch. This is the only tag which might be added > + without an explicit action by the person it names. > + > +Tested-by: The patch has been successfully tested (in some > + environment) by the person named. > + > + > +---- > + > +Reviewer's statement of oversight, v0.02 > + > +By offering my Reviewed-by: tag, I state that: > + > + (a) I have carried out a technical review of this patch to evaluate its > + appropriateness and readiness for inclusion into the mainline kernel. > + > + (b) Any problems, concerns, or questions relating to the patch have been > + communicated back to the submitter. I am satisfied with how the > + submitter has responded to my comments. > + > + (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 > + modification to the kernel, and (2) free of known issues which would > + argue against its inclusion. > + > + (d) While I have reviewed the patch and believe it to be sound, I can not
cannot
quoted text
> + (unless explicitly stated elsewhere) make any warranties or guarantees > + that it will achieve its stated purpose or function properly in any > + given situation. > + > + (e) I understand and agree that this project and the contribution are > + public and that a record of the contribution (including my Reviewed-by > + tag and any associated public communications) is maintained > + indefinitely and may be redistributed consistent with this project or > + the open source license(s) involved. > -
--- ~Randy -
unsubscribe notice
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/
Previous message: [
thread
] [
date
] [
author
]
Next message: [
thread
] [
date
] [
author
]
Messages in current thread:
RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Jonathan Corbet
, (Mon Oct 8, 1:24 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Mark Gross
, (Mon Oct 8, 2:40 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Stefan Richter
, (Mon Oct 8, 2:53 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Al Viro
, (Mon Oct 8, 3:05 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Jonathan Corbet
, (Mon Oct 8, 3:08 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Sam Ravnborg
, (Mon Oct 8, 1:37 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Jonathan Corbet
, (Mon Oct 8, 6:43 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Scott Preece
, (Wed Oct 10, 9:40 am)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Stefan Richter
, (Mon Oct 8, 7:42 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, J. Bruce Fields
, (Mon Oct 8, 7:30 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Alan Cox
, (Tue Oct 9, 6:28 am)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Randy Dunlap
, (Mon Oct 8, 7:06 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Stephen Hemminger
, (Mon Oct 8, 11:34 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Jan Engelhardt
, (Mon Oct 8, 1:45 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, H. Peter Anvin
, (Mon Oct 8, 4:33 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Theodore Tso
, (Mon Oct 8, 5:38 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Oleg Verych
, (Mon Oct 8, 7:20 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Rafael J. Wysocki
, (Mon Oct 8, 6:18 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Scott Preece
, (Mon Oct 8, 3:35 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Roland Dreier
, (Mon Oct 8, 2:40 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Stefan Richter
, (Mon Oct 8, 2:26 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Jeremy Fitzhardinge
, (Mon Oct 8, 2:01 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Randy Dunlap
, (Mon Oct 8, 2:06 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Stefan Richter
, (Mon Oct 8, 2:34 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, J. Bruce Fields
, (Mon Oct 8, 2:52 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Scott Preece
, (Mon Oct 8, 3:26 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Rafael J. Wysocki
, (Mon Oct 8, 4:16 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Steven Rostedt
, (Mon Oct 8, 10:07 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Stefan Richter
, (Tue Oct 9, 2:11 am)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Sam Ravnborg
, (Tue Oct 9, 2:27 am)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Stefan Richter
, (Tue Oct 9, 2:39 am)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Stefan Richter
, (Tue Oct 9, 2:47 am)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Stefan Richter
, (Mon Oct 8, 3:04 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Jeremy Fitzhardinge
, (Mon Oct 8, 2:16 pm)
Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
, Pekka Enberg
, (Mon Oct 8, 1:31 pm)
Navigation
Create content
Mailing list archives
Recent posts
Popular discussions
linux-kernel
:
Kok, Auke
Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23 - ioat/dma engine
Jeff Garzik
Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3
Greg Kroah-Hartman
[PATCH 001/196] Chinese: Add the known_regression URI to the HOWTO
Matthew Garrett
[PATCH] Remove process freezer from suspend to RAM pathway
linux-netdev
:
Gerrit Renker
[PATCH 15/37] dccp: Set per-connection CCIDs via socket options
David Miller
[GIT]: Networking
Jarek Poplawski
Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock().
Jens Axboe
Re: [BUG] New Kernel Bugs
git
:
openbsd-misc
:
Colocation donated by:
Who's online
There are currently
4 users
and
570 guests
online.
Online users
maroon395
rn36glay
carpetcleanermd
thaflo
Syndicate