From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <tglx@linutronix.de>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
	[172.17.192.35])
	by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 28A23C83
	for <ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Mon, 19 Aug 2019 08:26:10 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from Galois.linutronix.de (Galois.linutronix.de [193.142.43.55])
	by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B388467F
	for <ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Mon, 19 Aug 2019 08:26:09 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2019 10:26:01 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
In-Reply-To: <20190819065710.GC20455@quack2.suse.cz>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1908191024430.1923@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
References: <20190706142738.GA6893@kunai>
	<CAMuHMdUVtz6_3-9_+QLRWt6x7fauvA0K4p77eOcyVWo_oO9g5g@mail.gmail.com>
	<20190708115949.GC1050@kunai> <20190715125800.22a9a979@coco.lan>
	<20190715170045.GB3068@mit.edu>
	<alpine.DEB.2.21.999.1908172131550.15337@utopia.booyaka.com>
	<20190819065710.GC20455@quack2.suse.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+samsung@kernel.org>,
	ksummit <ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] Keeping reviews
 meaningful
List-Id: <ksummit-discuss.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/ksummit-discuss>,
	<mailto:ksummit-discuss-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/ksummit-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ksummit-discuss-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ksummit-discuss>,
	<mailto:ksummit-discuss-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>

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.

The R: in MAINTAINERS is there to make sure these people get actually CC'ed
on patches against that particular subsystem. It does not mean that others
are not allowed or encouraged to review patches in that area.

Thanks,

	tglx