> > 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 [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
