On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 9:03 PM, Matt Turner <matts...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 5:23 PM, Ilia Mirkin <imir...@alum.mit.edu> wrote: >> Yes, sorry, thought that was implied since I had given it earlier >> pending my (as it turns out, incorrect) suggestion. > > A number of people have been confused (rightly so) by "LGTM" implying > Reviewed-by. Let's please not ever start implying or inferring > Reviewed-bys from anything less than a reply actually saying > Reviewed-by in the format expected to go into the commit message.
Well, I had supplied it before, conditional on a (seemingly at the time) trivial change. Then I agreed that my condition was wrong. I thought that qualified as "good enough" to not have to re-give the R-b. -ilia _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
