[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <470A73E9.4080504@goop.org>
Date: Mon, 08 Oct 2007 11:16:09 -0700
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>
CC: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...putergmbh.de>,
Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
Subject: Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
Randy Dunlap wrote:
> but Tested-by: doesn't have to involve any "actually looking at/reading
> the patch." Right?
>
> IOW, the patch could be ugly as sin but it works...
>
Sure, absolutely. I never said its a substitute for review. An ugly
working patch is useful, because its the raw material for a nice working
patch. A nice non-working patch can be framed and admired from a
distance, but it isn't terribly useful.
J
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists