From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1755259AbdBQDJD (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Thu, 16 Feb 2017 22:09:03 -0500
Received: from server.atrad.com.au ([150.101.241.2]:43352 "EHLO
        server.atrad.com.au" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1752649AbdBQDJC (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Thu, 16 Feb 2017 22:09:02 -0500
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2017 13:38:04 +1030
From: Jonathan Woithe <jwoithe@just42.net>
To: Darren Hart <dvhart@infradead.org>
Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>,
        Micha?? K??pie?? <kernel@kempniu.pl>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andy@infradead.org>,
        Platform Driver <platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] fujitsu-laptop: renames and cleanups
Message-ID: <20170217030804.GT30026@marvin.atrad.com.au>
References: <20170208134633.5152-1-kernel@kempniu.pl>
 <20170210001616.GH1950@marvin.atrad.com.au>
 <CAHp75VeedmO7yyFjfp3VwrqZa6BmE06Xq1oxdugaYn=YEP2Aww@mail.gmail.com>
 <20170217025708.GH6814@wisp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20170217025708.GH6814@wisp>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
X-MIMEDefang-action: accept
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 06:57:08PM -0800, Darren Hart wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 02:42:00AM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 2:16 AM, Jonathan Woithe <jwoithe@just42.net> wrote:
> > > On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 02:46:23PM +0100, Micha?? K??pie?? wrote:
> > 
> > > In summary, I see no issues with this patch series which provides a much
> > > needed clean up of the code and naming conventions within the fujitsu-laptop
> > > driver.  I'm happy for this series (patches 1-10/10) to be applied.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Jonathan Woithe <jwoithe@just42.net>
> > 
> > I have noticed people start using SoB for the code they are
> > maintaining w/o sending any pull requests.
> > It is okay, but there is, as Wolfram pointed, a downside for patchwork
> > users. Patchwork is tracking tags (A/R/T) which by a glance allows to
> > see what patches are acked/reviewed/tested.
> 
> Signed-off-by tracks the path the code takes from author to mainline. If you are
> not the author or committing it to a tree followed by a pull-request, the
> correct tag is "Reviewed-by".

Yes, of course - I clearly had a brain fade back there.  Having said that, 
in the past I've used "Acked-by" intead of "Reviewed-by".

Do you want me to continue to use Acked-by, or should I switch to
Reviewed-by?

Regards
  jonathan