linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/10] fujitsu-laptop: renames and cleanups

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 17 Feb 2017 13:38:04 +1030
From:   Jonathan Woithe <jwoithe@...t42.net>
To:     Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>
Cc:     Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>,
        Micha?? K??pie?? <kernel@...pniu.pl>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andy@...radead.org>,
        Platform Driver <platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] fujitsu-laptop: renames and cleanups

On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 06:57:08PM -0800, Darren Hart wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 02:42:00AM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 2:16 AM, Jonathan Woithe <jwoithe@...t42.net> wrote:
> > > On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 02:46:23PM +0100, Micha?? K??pie?? wrote:
> > 
> > > In summary, I see no issues with this patch series which provides a much
> > > needed clean up of the code and naming conventions within the fujitsu-laptop
> > > driver.  I'm happy for this series (patches 1-10/10) to be applied.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Jonathan Woithe <jwoithe@...t42.net>
> > 
> > I have noticed people start using SoB for the code they are
> > maintaining w/o sending any pull requests.
> > It is okay, but there is, as Wolfram pointed, a downside for patchwork
> > users. Patchwork is tracking tags (A/R/T) which by a glance allows to
> > see what patches are acked/reviewed/tested.
> 
> Signed-off-by tracks the path the code takes from author to mainline. If you are
> not the author or committing it to a tree followed by a pull-request, the
> correct tag is "Reviewed-by".

Yes, of course - I clearly had a brain fade back there.  Having said that, 
in the past I've used "Acked-by" intead of "Reviewed-by".

Do you want me to continue to use Acked-by, or should I switch to
Reviewed-by?

Regards
  jonathan