[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] We need more reviewers/maintainers!!
From: |
Avi Kivity |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] We need more reviewers/maintainers!! |
Date: |
Tue, 13 Mar 2012 15:27:43 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:10.0.1) Gecko/20120216 Thunderbird/10.0.1 |
On 03/12/2012 08:18 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> >
> > * Reviewed-by: Full Name <email>
> >
> > A Reviewed-by tag is a statement of opinion that the patch is an
> > appropriate
> > modification without any remaining serious technical issues. Any
> > interested
> > reviewer (who has done the work) can offer a Reviewed-by tag for a patch.
> >
> >
> > My understanding until now was that both Acked-by and Reviewed-by were tags
> > reserved to people with privileges to write into the repository.
>
> Anybody should be allowed to give his own Acked-by or Reviewed-by, not
> just maintainers. Of course an acked-by from the maintainer of the area
> the patch is touching has a different weight.
To me, an Ack is reserved for people who have authority in an area,
either by being the formal maintainer of the subsystem, or by just being
an expert in that area. An Acked-by short-circuit's the following exchange:
Author: submit patch P
Maintainer: P touches subsystem X, what do Expert E and sub-maintainer
M have to say about it?
E, M: looks okay
The acked-by allows the maintainer to skip the exchange. Of course
usually patches should go through a submaintainer tree, but sometimes
this is not feasible, either because there is no tree for that area, or
because the patch or patchset touches many subsystems.
So an ack should come from people who expect to be asked about the patch.
(but this is nit-picking, any review is welcome regardless of the tag it
comes with)
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
- Re: [Qemu-devel] We need more reviewers/maintainers!!, (continued)
- Re: [Qemu-devel] We need more reviewers/maintainers!!, Stefano Stabellini, 2012/03/12
- Re: [Qemu-devel] We need more reviewers/maintainers!!, Anthony Liguori, 2012/03/12
- Re: [Qemu-devel] We need more reviewers/maintainers!!, Stefano Stabellini, 2012/03/12
- Re: [Qemu-devel] We need more reviewers/maintainers!!, Anthony Liguori, 2012/03/12
- Re: [Qemu-devel] We need more reviewers/maintainers!!, Stefano Stabellini, 2012/03/13
- Re: [Qemu-devel] We need more reviewers/maintainers!!, Kevin Wolf, 2012/03/13
- Re: [Qemu-devel] We need more reviewers/maintainers!!, Stefano Stabellini, 2012/03/13
- Re: [Qemu-devel] We need more reviewers/maintainers!!, Paolo Bonzini, 2012/03/13
Re: [Qemu-devel] We need more reviewers/maintainers!!, Lluís Vilanova, 2012/03/12
- Re: [Qemu-devel] We need more reviewers/maintainers!!, Stefano Stabellini, 2012/03/12
- Re: [Qemu-devel] We need more reviewers/maintainers!!,
Avi Kivity <=
- Re: [Qemu-devel] We need more reviewers/maintainers!!, Andreas Färber, 2012/03/14
- Re: [Qemu-devel] We need more reviewers/maintainers!!, Anthony Liguori, 2012/03/14
- Re: [Qemu-devel] We need more reviewers/maintainers!!, Peter Maydell, 2012/03/14
- Re: [Qemu-devel] We need more reviewers/maintainers!!, Anthony Liguori, 2012/03/14
- Re: [Qemu-devel] We need more reviewers/maintainers!!, Andreas Färber, 2012/03/14
Re: [Qemu-devel] We need more reviewers/maintainers!!, Anthony Liguori, 2012/03/12
Re: [Qemu-devel] We need more reviewers/maintainers!!, Andreas Färber, 2012/03/13
Re: [Qemu-devel] We need more reviewers/maintainers!!, Michael Roth, 2012/03/12