On Tue, 23 Oct 2012, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-10-23 at 23:47 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
> > Not so good to me.
> >
> > > Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <eduma...@google.com>
> >
> > And that should be either an Acked-by or a Reviewed-by. You can't sign
> > off on patches which have not been submitted or transported by you.
>
> I actually gave some input, provided a hash function, and so on.
>
> So this SOB was valid. I do that all the time.
Not really. I recommend you to read the relevant file in Documentation
which covers what can have your SOB.
Your input is documented in the mail thread, but it does not contain a
patch - which is Signed-off-by YOU - on which the thing at hand is
based on. So it's not covered by what SOB actually means.
You can rightfully request the patch author to add a "Suggested-by"
tag, but you can't rightfully claim authorship of something you did
not author.
> And yes, there are bugs in this patch, as many patches that were merged
> in linux tree, included by you.
That's a totally different issue. We can ack/review/signoff and commit
totally bogus patches as long as we want.
Though that does not change the meanings of the tags (Acked, Reviewed,
Signed-off) at all.
Thanks,
tglx
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
