[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20071008190515.GU8181@ftp.linux.org.uk>
Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2007 20:05:15 +0100
From: Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk>
To: Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>
Cc: mgross@...ux.intel.com, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
On Mon, Oct 08, 2007 at 08:53:05PM +0200, Stefan Richter wrote:
> Mark Gross wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 08, 2007 at 11:24:45AM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> >> (a) I have carried out a technical review of this patch to evaluate its
> >> appropriateness and readiness for inclusion into the mainline kernel.
> [...]
> >> (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 addition to the kernel, and (2) free of serious known
> >> issues which would argue against its inclusion.
> >
> > C-1 "worthwhile addition..." Probably shouldn't be part of this. That's
> > what additional Signed off by ACK's provide. I think reviewed by should
> > limit its scope to code correctness leaving the subjective "worthwhile"
> > statements are better expressed with other tags.
>
> A patch which is not "worthwhile" is also not "appropriate". Mere
> correctness in a mathematical sense is not enough as technical review
> criterion.
Yes, but there's also such thing as "worthwhile removal".
-
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