Re: [patch 1/6] Linux Kernel Markers - Architecture Independent Code

[Roland Dreier]

 > > Anybody got a proposed scheme for the case where somebody like myself
 > > who is *not* a member of the Maintainer Cabal has looked at a patch, and
 > > found a valid show-stopper that's bigger than just whitespace (breaks on
 > > 64-bit, locking issues, etc), or other commentary that *should* be addressed
 > > before it gets merged?  I'd like *some* way to tag a patch with "I had an
 > > issue with V1, but the author addressed it to my satisfaction in V2"....

 > I think that'd be Reviewed-By.  While you are not part of the smokey room
 > cabal you have shown technical expertise in various areas so it seems
 > perfectly fine to have reviewed-by from you.  The fix vs a previous version
 > should probably be just in the text with a paragraph ala:

 > Issue blah in a previous version as found by Valdis Kletnieks has been fixed
 > by doing foo.

At ksummit Andrew also mentioned including a link to the relevant
mailing list discussion too, and I think this would be a good example
of when that would be useful.

 - R.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/