From: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com>
To: corbet@lwn.net (Jonathan Corbet)
Cc: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight
Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2007 16:06:03 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20071008160603.52f9e343.randy.dunlap@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <10940.1191883390@lwn.net>
On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 16:43:10 -0600 Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org> wrote:
>
> > Or maybe we need something much less formal that explain the purpose of the
> > four tags we use:
>
> ...or maybe a combination? How does the following patch look as a way
> to describe how the tags are used and what Reviewed-by, in particular,
> means?
>
> Perhaps the DCO should move to this file as well?
>
> jon
Just typos noted below...
> ---
>
> Add a document on patch tags.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/00-INDEX b/Documentation/00-INDEX
> index 43e89b1..fa1518b 100644
> --- a/Documentation/00-INDEX
> +++ b/Documentation/00-INDEX
> @@ -284,6 +284,8 @@ parport.txt
> - how to use the parallel-port driver.
> parport-lowlevel.txt
> - description and usage of the low level parallel port functions.
> +patch-tags
> + - description of the tags which can be added to patches
> pci-error-recovery.txt
> - info on PCI error recovery.
> pci.txt
> diff --git a/Documentation/patch-tags b/Documentation/patch-tags
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..fb5f8e1
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/patch-tags
> @@ -0,0 +1,66 @@
> +Patches headed for the mainline may contain a variety of tags documenting
> +who played a hand in (or was at least aware of) its progress. All of these
> +tags have the form:
> +
> + Something-done-by: Full name <email@address>
> +
> +These tags are:
> +
> +Signed-off-by: A person adding a Signed-off-by tag is attesting that the
> + patch is, to the best of his or her knowledge, legally able
> + to be merged into the mainline and distributed under the
> + terms of the GNU General Public License, version 2. See
> + the Developer's Certificate of Origin, found in
> + Documentation/SubmittingPatches, for the precise meaning of
> + Signed-off-by.
> +
> +Acked-by: The person named (who should be an active developer in the
> + area addressed by the patch) is aware of the patch and has
> + no objection to its inclusion. An Acked-by tag does not
> + imply any involvement in the development of the patch or
> + that a detailed review was done.
> +
> +Reviewed-by: The patch has been reviewed and found acceptible according
acceptable
> + to the Reviewer's Statement as found at the bottom of this
> + file. A Reviewed-by tag is a statement of opinion that the
> + patch is an appropriate modification of the kernel without
> + any remaining serious technical issues. Any interested
> + reviewer (who has done the work) can offer a Reviewed-by
> + tag for a patch.
> +
> +Cc: The person named was given the opportunity to comment on
> + the patch. This is the only tag which might be added
> + without an explicit action by the person it names.
> +
> +Tested-by: The patch has been successfully tested (in some
> + environment) by the person named.
> +
> +
> +----
> +
> +Reviewer's statement of oversight, v0.02
> +
> +By offering my Reviewed-by: tag, I state that:
> +
> + (a) I have carried out a technical review of this patch to evaluate its
> + appropriateness and readiness for inclusion into the mainline kernel.
> +
> + (b) Any problems, concerns, or questions relating to the patch have been
> + communicated back to the submitter. I am satisfied with how the
> + submitter has responded to my comments.
> +
> + (c) While there may (or may not) be things which could be improved with
> + this submission, I believe that it is, at this time, (1) a worthwhile
> + modification to the kernel, and (2) free of known issues which would
> + argue against its inclusion.
> +
> + (d) While I have reviewed the patch and believe it to be sound, I can not
cannot
> + (unless explicitly stated elsewhere) make any warranties or guarantees
> + that it will achieve its stated purpose or function properly in any
> + given situation.
> +
> + (e) I understand and agree that this project and the contribution are
> + public and that a record of the contribution (including my Reviewed-by
> + tag and any associated public communications) is maintained
> + indefinitely and may be redistributed consistent with this project or
> + the open source license(s) involved.
> -
---
~Randy
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-10-08 23:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-10-08 17:24 RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight Jonathan Corbet
2007-10-08 17:31 ` Pekka Enberg
2007-10-08 17:37 ` Sam Ravnborg
2007-10-08 17:45 ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-10-08 18:01 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2007-10-08 18:06 ` Randy Dunlap
2007-10-08 18:16 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2007-10-08 18:34 ` Stefan Richter
2007-10-08 18:52 ` J. Bruce Fields
2007-10-08 19:04 ` Stefan Richter
2007-10-08 19:26 ` Scott Preece
2007-10-08 20:16 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-10-09 2:07 ` Steven Rostedt
2007-10-09 6:11 ` Stefan Richter
2007-10-09 6:27 ` Sam Ravnborg
2007-10-09 6:39 ` Stefan Richter
2007-10-09 6:47 ` Stefan Richter
2007-10-08 18:26 ` Stefan Richter
2007-10-08 18:40 ` Roland Dreier
2007-10-08 19:35 ` Scott Preece
2007-10-08 20:33 ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-10-08 21:38 ` Theodore Tso
2007-10-08 22:18 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-10-08 23:20 ` Oleg Verych
2007-10-08 22:43 ` Jonathan Corbet
2007-10-08 23:06 ` Randy Dunlap [this message]
2007-10-09 3:34 ` Stephen Hemminger
2007-10-08 23:30 ` J. Bruce Fields
2007-10-09 10:28 ` Alan Cox
2007-10-08 23:42 ` Stefan Richter
2007-10-09 0:05 ` Neil Brown
2007-10-09 16:49 ` Jonathan Corbet
2007-10-09 17:25 ` Roland Dreier
2007-10-10 0:06 ` David Chinner
2007-10-15 0:27 ` Neil Brown
2007-10-09 17:44 ` Sam Ravnborg
2007-10-15 0:35 ` Neil Brown
2007-10-15 14:32 ` Sam Ravnborg
2007-10-10 13:40 ` Scott Preece
2007-10-08 18:40 ` Mark Gross
2007-10-08 18:53 ` Stefan Richter
2007-10-08 19:05 ` Al Viro
2007-10-08 19:08 ` Jonathan Corbet
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20071008160603.52f9e343.randy.dunlap@oracle.com \
--to=randy.dunlap@oracle.com \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sam@ravnborg.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox