* [Buildroot] [PATCH v2] manual: clarify Tested-by/Reviewed-by/Acked-by tags
@ 2014-03-02 14:17 Thomas De Schampheleire
2014-03-02 14:32 ` Samuel Martin
2014-03-02 15:24 ` Thomas Petazzoni
0 siblings, 2 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Thomas De Schampheleire @ 2014-03-02 14:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: buildroot
This patch updates the manual with more clarified descriptions of tags
Tested-by, Reviewed-by, and Acked-by, as discussed on the Buildroot
developer days in February 2014.
Signed-off-by: Thomas De Schampheleire <thomas.de.schampheleire@gmail.com>
---
v2: fix mistake Tested-by -> Reviewed-by in comparison with Acked-by (Samuel)
docs/manual/contribute.txt | 43 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
1 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/docs/manual/contribute.txt b/docs/manual/contribute.txt
--- a/docs/manual/contribute.txt
+++ b/docs/manual/contribute.txt
@@ -145,10 +145,47 @@ submissions.
Some tags are used to help following the state of any patch posted on
the mailing-list:
-Acked-by:: Indicates that the patch can be committed.
+Tested-by:: Indicates that the patch has been tested in one way or
+ another. You are encouraged to specify what kind of testing you
+ performed (compile-test on architecture X and Y, runtime test on
+ target A, ...). This additional information helps other testers and
+ the maintainer.
-Tested-by:: Indicates that the patch has been tested. It is useful
- but not necessary to add a comment about what has been tested.
+Reviewed-by:: Indicates that you code-reviewed the patch and did your
+ best in spotting problems, but you are not sufficiently familiar with
+ the area touched to provide an Acked-by tag. This means that there
+ may be remaining problems in the patch that would be spotted by
+ someone with more experience in that area. Should such problems be
+ detected, your Reviewed-by tag remains appropriate and you cannot
+ be blamed.
+
+Acked-by:: Indicates that you code-reviewed the patch and you are
+familiar enough with the area touched to feel that the patch can be
+committed as-is (no additional changes required). In case it later turns
+out that something is wrong with the patch, your Acked-by could be
+considered inappropriate. The difference between Acked-by and
+Reviewed-by is thus mainly that you are prepared to take the blame on
+Acked patches, but not on Reviewed ones.
+
+If you reviewed a patch and have comments on it, you should simply reply
+to the patch stating these comments, without providing a Reviewed-by or
+Acked-by tag. These tags should only be provided if you judge the patch
+to be good as it is.
+
+It is important to note that neither Reviewed-by nor Acked-by imply
+that testing has been performed. To indicate that you both reviewed and
+tested the patch, provide two separate tags (Reviewed/Acked-by and
+Tested-by).
+
+Note also that _any developer_ can provide Tested/Reviewed/Acked-by
+tags, without exception, and we encourage everyone to do this. Buildroot
+does not have a defined group of _core_ developers, it just so happens
+that some developers are more active than others. The maintainer will
+value tags according to the track record of their submitter. Tags
+provided by a regular contributor will naturally be trusted more than
+tags provided by a newcomer. As you provide tags more regularly, your
+'trustworthiness' (in the eyes of the maintainer) will go up, but _any_
+tag provided is valuable.
Buildroot's Patchwork website can be used to pull in patches for testing
purposes. Please see xref:apply-patches-patchwork[] for more
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* [Buildroot] [PATCH v2] manual: clarify Tested-by/Reviewed-by/Acked-by tags
2014-03-02 14:17 [Buildroot] [PATCH v2] manual: clarify Tested-by/Reviewed-by/Acked-by tags Thomas De Schampheleire
@ 2014-03-02 14:32 ` Samuel Martin
2014-03-02 15:24 ` Thomas Petazzoni
1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Samuel Martin @ 2014-03-02 14:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: buildroot
On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 3:17 PM, Thomas De Schampheleire
<patrickdepinguin@gmail.com> wrote:
> This patch updates the manual with more clarified descriptions of tags
> Tested-by, Reviewed-by, and Acked-by, as discussed on the Buildroot
> developer days in February 2014.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas De Schampheleire <thomas.de.schampheleire@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Samuel Martin <s.martin49@gmail.com>
Regards,
--
Samuel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* [Buildroot] [PATCH v2] manual: clarify Tested-by/Reviewed-by/Acked-by tags
2014-03-02 14:17 [Buildroot] [PATCH v2] manual: clarify Tested-by/Reviewed-by/Acked-by tags Thomas De Schampheleire
2014-03-02 14:32 ` Samuel Martin
@ 2014-03-02 15:24 ` Thomas Petazzoni
1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Petazzoni @ 2014-03-02 15:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: buildroot
Dear Thomas De Schampheleire,
On Sun, 02 Mar 2014 15:17:22 +0100, Thomas De Schampheleire wrote:
> This patch updates the manual with more clarified descriptions of tags
> Tested-by, Reviewed-by, and Acked-by, as discussed on the Buildroot
> developer days in February 2014.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas De Schampheleire <thomas.de.schampheleire@gmail.com>
Applied, thanks.
Thomas
--
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2014-03-02 15:24 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2014-03-02 14:17 [Buildroot] [PATCH v2] manual: clarify Tested-by/Reviewed-by/Acked-by tags Thomas De Schampheleire
2014-03-02 14:32 ` Samuel Martin
2014-03-02 15:24 ` Thomas Petazzoni
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox