On Fri, 07 Sep 2007 12:04:45 EDT, Theodore Tso said: > This was proposed by Andrew and discussed at the Kernel Summit; the > basic idea is that it is a formal indication that the person has done > a *full* review of the patch (a few random comments from the local > whitespace police don't count),
Anybody got a proposed scheme for the case where somebody like myself who is *not* a member of the Maintainer Cabal has looked at a patch, and found a valid show-stopper that's bigger than just whitespace (breaks on 64-bit, locking issues, etc), or other commentary that *should* be addressed before it gets merged? I'd like *some* way to tag a patch with "I had an issue with V1, but the author addressed it to my satisfaction in V2".... (Note that includes "the author convinced me the patch was right and I was wrong"...)
pgpuQ0eJfPiaT.pgp
Description: PGP signature
