On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 6:24 PM, Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pi...@linaro.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Aug 2011, Dave Martin wrote:
>
>> Acked-by = This patch is definitely right, or I fully agree with the
>> patch and trust the author's judgement ("I will share
>> responsibility for the correctness and appropriateness of this
>> patch"). This implies Reviewed-by.
>> Normally an ack shouldn't
>> get added unless the acker is confident that the patch is
>> adequately tested (where the level of testing deemed adequate
>> depends on the complexity of the patch) Again, this may rely on
>> judgement of the comptence of the author and the other
>> reviewers.
>>
>> Reviewed-by = This patch looks correct and appropriate and I judge it
>> ok to merge, but I assume the author knows what they're
>> doing, and I don't necessarily take responsibility for the
>> change.
>
> I think some aspects of the above two are mixed up.
>
> Normally, ACK == acknowledgement i.e. "I conceptually agree with the
> patch", but that doesn't necessarily mean that it was reviewed
> thoroughly. In other words, this quite matches your definition, but
> does not imply a Reviewed-by, and that assumes the author knows what
> they're doing.
>
> Reviewed-by means that you did review the patch content in details,
> whether or not the author knows what they're doing. A Reviewed-by
> obviously implies an Acked-by.
Interesting... I thought there was a chance I was getting this wrong.
My impression was that an Ack carries more weight with upstream
maintainers when it comes to merging; but does it instead depend on
_who_ the tag comes from? (i.e., if an experienced and well-known
person takes a cursory glance at the patch and the review that's gone
on and Acks it, this may carry more weight than a Reviewed-by by a
less well-known person?)
Cheers
---Dave
_______________________________________________
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
