From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BCCE8B1F for ; Mon, 19 Aug 2019 08:04:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mx1.suse.de (mx2.suse.de [195.135.220.15]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0CBCA67F for ; Mon, 19 Aug 2019 08:04:43 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2019 10:04:40 +0200 From: Jan Kara To: Julia Lawall Message-ID: <20190819080440.GA2491@quack2.suse.cz> References: <20190706142738.GA6893@kunai> <20190708115949.GC1050@kunai> <20190715125800.22a9a979@coco.lan> <20190715170045.GB3068@mit.edu> <20190819065710.GC20455@quack2.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab , ksummit Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] Keeping reviews meaningful List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Mon 19-08-19 09:06:26, Julia Lawall wrote: > On Mon, 19 Aug 2019, Jan Kara wrote: > > > On Sat 17-08-19 21:35:29, Paul Walmsley wrote: > > > On Mon, 15 Jul 2019, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: > > > > > > > I'd suggest changing the text to read: > > > > > > > > - Acked-by: indicates an agreement by the maintainer or > > > > reviewer of the the relevant code that the patch is > > > > appropriate for inclusion into the kernel. > > > > > > This would be a positive step forward. I would be in favor of this. > > > > > > It would also be good to state here, if it isn't stated already, that > > > "reviewer" means "someone who is listed in an R: line in MAINTAINERS". > > > > I don't think that 'R:' entry in MAINTAINERS should be really asked for. > > IMO that is unnecessary bureaucracy and discourages review from people > > that are not core developers. Sure the quality of the review may be lower > > than from core developer but still there's some value in it. So I'd really > > leave it at the discretion of the maintainer whether he accepts or just > > ignores Reviewed-by tag. > > Is there some other tag for "I'm interested in and reasonably > knowledgeable about this change and it looks good to me"? > > Note that there is a double "the" in the above text. No. But is there a need for such tag? I, as a maintainer, would like to see in the email where someone offers the Reviewed-by tag, how confident the reviewer feels (otherwise I just make my educated guess). But I don't really see a point in recording this in the changelog. After all the tag in the changelog serves only two purposes I know about - to give credit to the reviewer and to have another person to blame (CC on bug reports ;). So I don't see any need in recording quality of review in the changelog for long-term recording of the fact... Honza -- Jan Kara SUSE Labs, CR