On Mon, Dec 01, 2008 at 07:42:31PM +0100, Oliver Hartkopp wrote:
quoted text
> Sam Ravnborg wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 01, 2008 at 05:15:42PM +0100, Oliver Hartkopp wrote:
>>   
>>>
>>> Thanks to Kurt Van Dijck for pointing at this issue and for the review.
>>>
>>> Signed-Off-by: Oliver Hartkopp <oliver@hartkopp.net>
>>> Acked-by: Kurt Van Dijck <kurt.van.dijck@eia.be>
>>>     
>>
>> If Kurt tested this patch then he should
>> be credited with a "Tested-by:" tag.
>>
>> I recall he did but I deleted the thread from my can mailbox.
>>
>> 	Sam
>>   
> Hi Sam,
>
> i did some testing and posted the results of a first patch that went  
> into the final direction.
>
> In
>
> https://lists.berlios.de/pipermail/socketcan-core/2008-December/002117.html
>
> Kurt gave a "Reviewed-by:" and in a later mail in
>
> https://lists.berlios.de/pipermail/socketcan-core/2008-December/002119.html
>
> he wrote "my Acked-by: still stands" for the final patch.
>
> So i choosed "Acked-by:".
>
> As Kurt went that deep into the code that he pointed me to the right  
> line and presented a first idea for a patch, an 'Acked-by:' for  
> confirming the final patch looked like an appropriate credit to me.
Well, I did not physically test Oliver's final patch, which looked totally
different.
By lack of time, did not take the effort of completely testing it again. The test
scenario included the problematic scenario, which made me think Oliver
understood the problem.
For the final patch, a 'Acked-by:' looks appropriate to me too.
Sam,
I'm pleased to notice the credits are watched this close too.
quoted text
>
> Regards,
> Oliver
>
Kurt
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html