Re: GNU Tools Cauldron 2017 follow up: "Reviewed-by" etc.

Carlos O'Donell
2017-10-19T17:08:48Z

On 10/19/2017 09:45 AM, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Oct 2017, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
>
>> Hi!
>>
>> Still waiting for any kind of reaction -- general process-change inertia,
>> chicken-and-egg problem, I suppose. ;-/
>>
>> I have now put the proposed text onto a wiki page, so that those
>> interested have a convenient handle to use,
>> <https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Reviewed-by>.
>
> That wiki page refers to Reviewed-by as being about crediting reviewers.
> But the specification appears to be oriented to something else entirely
> (i.e. convincing a committer - in a Linux-kernel-like context with a very
> limited set of committers to a particular tree, much smaller than the set
> of reviewers - that a patch is worthy of commit). It doesn't cover
> reviews that request changes, or only relate to part of a patch, or relate
> to a previous version of a patch - only the limited special case of a
> review approving the entirety of a patch as posted. If the aim is credit,
> a substantially different specification is needed.

If a person is requesting changes, they should after accepting the changes,
submit a 'Reviewed-by:' tag or 'Acked-by:' tag to indicate they are happy
with the results?

--
Cheers,
Carlos.