On 03/14/2012 08:58 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
On 14 March 2012 13:52, Anthony Liguori<anth...@codemonkey.ws> wrote:
On 03/14/2012 08:50 AM, Andreas Färber wrote:
What I have wondered is, is there any semantic difference between "Ack",
"Acked", "ACK" and "Acked-by: name<email>"? I.e., when someone replies
with "Ack", should one document that as an Acked-by for a PULL?
No, Acked-by: name<email> is a formal statement. You shouldn't infer an
Acked-by IMHO.
This is in contradiction to the kernel docs we reference, which say:
# Acked-by: is not as formal as Signed-off-by:. It is a record that the acker
# has at least reviewed the patch and has indicated acceptance. Hence patch
# mergers will sometimes manually convert an acker's "yep, looks good to me"
# into an Acked-by:.
Oh, I guess I stand corrected. It would certainly surprise me if someone added
my Acked-by without asking me but maybe this is just American politeness...
Regards,
Anthony Liguori
-- PMM
