<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xml:base="http://kerneltrap.org"  xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
 <title>KernelTrap - signed-off-by</title>
 <link>http://kerneltrap.org/taxonomy/term/245/0</link>
 <description></description>
 <language>en-local</language>
<item>
 <title>Defining the Reviewed-by Tag</title>
 <link>http://kerneltrap.org/Linux/Defining_the_Reviewed-by_Tag</link>
 <description>&lt;div class=&quot;taxonomy-images&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/news/linux&quot; class=&quot;taxonomy-image-links&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://kerneltrap.org/files/category_pictures/K-Linux.gif&quot; alt=&quot;Linux news&quot; title=&quot;Linux news&quot;  width=&quot;75&quot; height=&quot;75&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;!-- google_ad_section_start --&gt;&lt;p&gt;&quot;&lt;i&gt;Last month, at the kernel summit, there was discussion of putting a Reviewed-by: tag onto patches to document the oversight they had received on their way into the mainline,&lt;/i&gt;&quot; began Jonathan Corbet in an effort to &lt;a href=&quot;http://kerneltrap.org/mailarchive/linux-kernel/2007/10/8/332384&quot;&gt;define the meaning&lt;/a&gt; of the recently introduced &lt;code&gt;reviewed-by&lt;/code&gt; tag.  He continued, &quot;&lt;i&gt;that tag has made an occasional appearance since then, but there has not yet been a discussion of what it really means.  So it has not yet brought a whole lot of value to the process.&lt;/i&gt;&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the continued discussion, it was requested that all commit tags be defined, prompting Jonathan to update his documentation to include Signed-off-by, Acked-by, Cc, and Tested-by along with his documentation for Reviewed-by.  He offered the following definition for the new Reviewed-by tag:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;p&gt;&quot;The patch has been reviewed and found acceptible according to the Reviewer&#039;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.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;
&lt;!-- google_ad_section_end --&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://kerneltrap.org/Linux/Defining_the_Reviewed-by_Tag&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://kerneltrap.org/Linux/Defining_the_Reviewed-by_Tag#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://kerneltrap.org/acked-by">acked-by</category>
 <category domain="http://kerneltrap.org/documentation">documentation</category>
 <category domain="http://kerneltrap.org/Jonathan_Corbet">Jonathan Corbet</category>
 <category domain="http://kerneltrap.org/kernel_summit">kernel summit</category>
 <category domain="http://kerneltrap.org/Linux">Linux</category>
 <category domain="http://kerneltrap.org/reviewed-by">reviewed-by</category>
 <category domain="http://kerneltrap.org/taxonomy/term/245">signed-off-by</category>
 <category domain="http://kerneltrap.org/taxonomy/term/1054">tested-by</category>
 <category domain="http://kerneltrap.org/news/linux">Linux news</category>
 <pubDate>Tue, 09 Oct 2007 03:07:22 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Jeremy</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">14539 at http://kerneltrap.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Linux: Using Acked-by Tags</title>
 <link>http://kerneltrap.org/node/8329</link>
 <description>&lt;div class=&quot;taxonomy-images&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/news/linux&quot; class=&quot;taxonomy-image-links&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://kerneltrap.org/files/category_pictures/K-Linux.gif&quot; alt=&quot;Linux news&quot; title=&quot;Linux news&quot;  width=&quot;75&quot; height=&quot;75&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;!-- google_ad_section_start --&gt;&lt;p&gt;Andrew Morton submitted some documentation explaining the use of the &quot;Signed-off-by&quot; and &quot;Acked-by&quot; tags added when patches are submitted for conclusion into the Linux kernel.  &quot;&lt;i&gt;The Signed-off-by: tag implies that the signer was involved in the development of the patch, or that he/she was in the patch&#039;s delivery path,&lt;/i&gt;&quot; the documentation explains, &quot;&lt;i&gt;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&#039;s changelog.&lt;/i&gt;&quot;  When asked about the possibility of including &quot;Tested-by&quot; tags, Andrew replied, &quot;&lt;i&gt;I think it&#039;s very useful information to have.  For a start, it tells you who has the hardware and knows how to build a kernel.  So if you&#039;re making a change to a driver and want it tested, you can troll the file&#039;s changelog looking for people who might be able to help.&lt;/i&gt;&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The thread went on to discuss if Ack and Nack patches were useful from non-maintainers.  Andrew suggested that a without additional information they don&#039;t offer much, &quot;&lt;i&gt;it&#039;s better to just provide constructive, detailed technical comments and from that it becomes pretty obvious to all parties whether or not the patch has a future.  If you did properly provide that useful feedback then the &#039;ack&#039; or &#039;nack&#039; bit becomes redundant.&lt;/i&gt;&quot;  He went on to stress the need for useful feedback, &quot;&lt;i&gt;frankly, I don&#039;t trust a simple &#039;ack&#039; much at all.  It&#039;s the kernel equivalent of &#039;whoa, kewl!&#039;&lt;/i&gt;&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;!-- google_ad_section_end --&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://kerneltrap.org/node/8329&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://kerneltrap.org/node/8329#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://kerneltrap.org/taxonomy/term/247">ack</category>
 <category domain="http://kerneltrap.org/acked-by">acked-by</category>
 <category domain="http://kerneltrap.org/Andrew_Morton">Andrew Morton</category>
 <category domain="http://kerneltrap.org/documentation">documentation</category>
 <category domain="http://kerneltrap.org/taxonomy/term/248">nack</category>
 <category domain="http://kerneltrap.org/taxonomy/term/245">signed-off-by</category>
 <category domain="http://kerneltrap.org/news/linux">Linux news</category>
 <pubDate>Thu, 07 Jun 2007 17:56:07 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Jeremy</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">8329 at http://kerneltrap.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Linux:  Clarifying the Developer&#039;s Certificate of Origin</title>
 <link>http://kerneltrap.org/node/5277</link>
 <description>&lt;div class=&quot;taxonomy-images&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/news/linux&quot; class=&quot;taxonomy-image-links&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://kerneltrap.org/files/category_pictures/K-Linux.gif&quot; alt=&quot;Linux news&quot; title=&quot;Linux news&quot;  width=&quot;75&quot; height=&quot;75&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;!-- google_ad_section_start --&gt;&lt;p&gt;Following SCO&#039;s allegations regarding the origination of some source code files comprising the Linux Kernel, in May of 2004 Linux creator Linus Torvalds implemented a simple method for tracking how patches reach the source tree [&lt;a href=&quot;http://kerneltrap.org/node/3180&quot;&gt;story&lt;/a&gt;].  The simple system was further refined in the following months [&lt;a href=&quot;http://kerneltrap.org/node/3929&quot;&gt;story&lt;/a&gt;], and has become second nature to most kernel developers.  However, a &lt;a href=&quot;http://kerneltrap.org/mailarchive/1/message/69318/flat&quot;&gt;recent debate&lt;/a&gt; on the &lt;a href=&quot;http://tux.org/lkml/&quot; target=&quot;new&quot;&gt;lkml&lt;/a&gt; illustrated the fact that nothing is simple, in this case with concerns that archiving someone else&#039;s email address in the &quot;Signed-off-by:&quot; line could violate the UK&#039;s &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.informationcommissioner.gov.uk/eventual.aspx?id=34&quot; target=&quot;new&quot;&gt;Data Protection Act&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Ala