Re: [patch 1/1] document Acked-by:

Andrew Morton
2007-06-03T04:16:14Z

On Sat, 2 Jun 2007 21:06:14 -0700 Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com> wrote:

> On Sat, 2 Jun 2007 19:57:41 -0700 Scott Preece wrote:
>
> > On 6/2/07, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> > > ...
> > > +The Signed-off-by: tag implies that the signer was involved in the development
> > ---
> >
> > Change "implies" to "indicates" - it's an explicit statement, not an
> > implication.
> >
> > ---
> > > +of the patch, or that he/she was in the patch's delivery path.
> > > +
> > > +If a person was not directly involved in the preparation or handling of a
> > > +patch but wishes to signify and record their approval of it then they can
> > > +arrange to have an Acked-by: line added to the patch's changelog.
> > > +
> > > +Acked-by: is often used by the maintainer of the affected code when that
> > > +maintainer neither contributed to nor forwarded the patch themselves.
> > ---
> >
> > This using plural pronouns for indefinite gender leaves one in vague
> > territory, but I think "themself" would be better than "themselves,
> > since "maintainer" is singular.
>
> ugh. :(
> not-acked-by: /me
>

I just deleted it ;)

"neither contributed to nor forwarded the patch."