On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 05:46:31PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Tue, 3 Jun 2014 16:52:53 -0400 > Theodore Ts'o <ty...@mit.edu> wrote: > > > > The important thing to note here is that we do not have consensus > > across all subsystems what Reviewed-by: means, and I think that's OK. > > The Reviewed-by: is mostly of interest to the maintainer before the > > patch is submitted to mainline. The value of keeping it in the git > > commit logs after the fact seems to be a bit variable, although if > > there are companies blindly using it as a performance metric and this > > is driving down the quality of reviews, perhaps one could even argue > > that including these tags in the git commit logs is actually adding > > negative value. But I don't really care about that issue, because > > like most maintainers, I know the reviewers by reputation, and whether > > someone actually says "you can add my Reviewed-by" is actually not so > > important as their comments on the patch, one way or another. > > I prefer the Reviewed-by tags in the git commit. If something is > screwed up in a commit, I can blame the reviewers just as much as I can > blame the author :-)
I like it there for the same reason: if there turns out to be an issue in a commit I reviewed, I'd like to get CCed on the resulting discussion and fix, so that I can take that into account in future reviews. - Josh Triplett -- 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/
