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

[Krzysztof Halasa <khc@pm.waw.pl>]

"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> writes:

> I think the comment had to do with the concept that ACK/NAK implies
> authority.  If you're not the maintainer, it's rude to imply that you
> are.  Obvious, test reports (good or bad!) are always welcome.

Well, I understand a test is a different thing, an experiment to
see if the patch works or not, while ack/etc. is just opinion
of someone who reads the patch without actually using it.

I think ack/etc doesn't, in any way, imply being the maintainer,
though it imply that the "acker" has actually read the code,
understands it, and believes it's correct (or not, and why).

If we want to differentiate between "authoritative" and
"non-authoritative" opinions (and the name and email address
aren't enough) then I think we need to state that explicite
(perhaps something like "Acked-by: FIRST M. LAST <addr>, XXX
subsystem maintainer" would suffice).
-- 
Krzysztof Halasa