Re: RFC: reviewer's statement of oversight

Randy Dunlap
2007-10-08T23:06:30Z

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