Am 08.07.2013 17:34, schrieb Peter Maydell: > On 8 July 2013 16:20, Anthony Liguori <anth...@codemonkey.ws> wrote: >> Right, it goes: >> >> 1) Acked-by: >> >> I haven't reviewed the code in detail but the general idea seems sane. >> >> 2) Reviewed-by: >> >> The general idea seems sane, and I have done a thorough review of the >> patch in question. >> >> 3) Signed-off-by: >> >> All of the above, plus I have ensured that the code is of good quality, >> does not break things, and the other things expected of a maintainer. >> This is considered to be a legally binding statement too based on the >> DCO so be aware of that and ensure you have the right approval to make >> such a statement. > > I agree with this and it matches my idea of what the semantics are.
Matches my understanding, too. Andreas -- SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer; HRB 16746 AG Nürnberg
