Cc: <git@...>, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...>, James Morris <jmorris@...>, Al Viro <viro@...>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...>, Willy Tarreau <w@...>, <david@...>, Stephen Clark <sclark46@...>, Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@...>, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...>, Tilman Schmidt <tilman@...>, <Valdis.Kletnieks@...>, Mark Lord <lkml@...>, David Miller <davem@...>, <yoshfuji@...>, <jeff@...>, <netdev@...>, David Newall <davidn@...>
On 16/04/2008, Sverre Rabbelier <alturin@gmail.com> wrote:
...
Interresting. Just be careful results are produced for the big picture
and not used to point fingers at individuals.
One thing I thought of is that the more "Acked-by", "Reviewed-by" and
"Signed-off-by" lines a patch has, the better reviewed we can probably
assume it to be and thus the probability of it having introduced a bug
probably drops slightly compared to other less-reviewed patches... or
maybe not, but at least it's something to think about :-)
--
Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@gmail.com>
Don't top-post http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/top-post.html
Plain text mails only, please http://www.expita.com/nomime.html
--