| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <50A2C5C3.8040804@am.sony.com> Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 14:12:19 -0800 From: Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@...sony.com> To: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org> CC: Thiago Farina <tfransosi@...il.com>, linux list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: acked-by meaning On 11/11/12 19:47, Randy Dunlap wrote: > On 11/11/2012 05:40 PM, Thiago Farina wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> What is the meaning of 'Acked-by:' line? Is the same of LGTM? How it >> differs from 'Reviewed-by:'? > > Reviewed-by: is stronger than Acked-by:. > If someone replies with Reviewed-by, they also accept some > responsibility for fixing any problems that the patch might > introduce after it is merged. I haven't found a "responsibility for fixing any problems" in the references provided below. Can you help me out by pointing to a specific sentence or another reference? > Acked-by just means agreement with the patch. > >> If someone acks a patch (can anybody acks or just the maintainer?), >> does it mean that he will also apply the patch to his tree? > > > Anybody can reply to a patch with Acked-by. > No, it doesn't mean that the replying/acking person will apply > the patch to any tree. > > > Have you read what Documentation/SubmittingPatches and > Documentation/development-process/5.Posting and 6.Followthrough > say about Acked-by? Thanks... -Frank -- 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