From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:60073)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <alex@alex.org.uk>) id 1UwCII-0002ag-58
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 08 Jul 2013 10:19:59 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <alex@alex.org.uk>) id 1UwCIG-00033G-Q5
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 08 Jul 2013 10:19:58 -0400
Received: from mail.avalus.com ([2001:41c8:10:1dd::10]:39235)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <alex@alex.org.uk>) id 1UwCIG-000336-Ky
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 08 Jul 2013 10:19:56 -0400
Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2013 15:19:43 +0100
From: Alex Bligh <alex@alex.org.uk>
Message-ID: <FE52EED476960CEBBF7C01D9@Ximines.local>
In-Reply-To: <CAFEAcA9sQXSEvTSU8JpPQV8kSsVrqg0zv5-P=w8o9Ei8WZTwUA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1372930249-22916-1-git-send-email-paul.durrant@citrix.com>
	<alpine.DEB.2.02.1307041352230.5067@kaball.uk.xensource.com>
	<87bo6ddu6k.fsf@codemonkey.ws>
	<CAFEAcA9sQXSEvTSU8JpPQV8kSsVrqg0zv5-P=w8o9Ei8WZTwUA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v5] Xen PV Device
Reply-To: Alex Bligh <alex@alex.org.uk>
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>, Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
Cc: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, xen-devel@lists.xen.org, Paul Durrant <paul.durrant@citrix.com>, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@citrix.com>, Alex Bligh <alex@alex.org.uk>, =?UTF-8?Q?Andreas_F=C3=A4rber?= <afaerber@suse.de>



--On 8 July 2013 15:10:49 +0100 Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> 
wrote:

>> You probably mean Reviewed-by.  Acked-by really means, "I am not the
>> maintainer of this area, I have not reviewed this patch, but I am
>> generally okay with the idea as best I can tell."
>
> Don't you mean "I *am* the maintainer of this area" ? I've always
> assumed it means "as the maintainer I have a potential veto over
> this code change and I am explicitly not exercising it even though
> I may not have done a complete review and/or test"...

Really? That would imply no one should add Acked-By except
maintainers. That's not right according to:

https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/Documentation/SubmittingPatches#L397

The use at line 401 by maintainers does not seem to me to be 'exclusive'.

For instance, I've used Acked-by when someone else modifies a piece
of code I've contributed (e.g. to fix a bug), to indicate I agree
with them.

It's also pretty clear (line 437 and 462) what Reviewed-by: means

-- 
Alex Bligh