From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sam Ravnborg Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 13:09:36 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] Report from the Buildroot Developer Day In-Reply-To: References: <20111102160349.4afe5935@skate> Message-ID: <20111107120936.GA26160@merkur.ravnborg.org> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net > > > > We however came up with a set of proposals for the development process > > organization: > > > > ?* We would like to encourage the community to help the maintainer job > > ? by reviewing others patches (making comments, and providing their > > ? Reviewed-by tags when they consider that the patch *looks* good) > > ? and even better by testing other patches (testing the package > > ? bumps, the new packages, etc. and providing their Tested-by > > ? tags). If a given patch has been tested by 1 or 2 developers other > > ? than the patch author, then Peter can trust that testing was done > > ? and merge the patch quickly. This is really the key point on which > > ? the community as a whole can help in making Buildroot move faster. > > Could someone clarify the difference between Acked-by and Reviewed-by ? > I looked up the Linux kernel definitions, but this didn't make it > clearer for me. The tags seems to be used in different ways. The way I have understood their usage - and thus the way I have used them is like this: Acked-by is used when I think that a patch does the right thing. For example when it introduces a a new feature or change something - and which I consider it the right thing to do. Reviewed-by is stronger in the sense that I have actually taking my time to carefully read the patch line-by-line and that I consider that the patch is correct. I almost never use "Reviewed-by" for patches touching code areas that I am not familiar with - as I do not know if they are correct. Reviewed-by includes an implicit Acked-by as I would not spend time to review something if I did not agree on the patch. Hope this helps... Sam