On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 14:38:00 +0200 Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > As a maintainer, I mostly use Acked-by for two slightly different cases: > > 1) I've seen the patch. I have no objections to it being merged, I > approve of it. I haven't done a detailed review of it. Additionally, > I may indicate whether a detailed review (by someone else) is > required, or whether I think the ack is sufficient for merging. > > 2) I'm fine with the patch to the area I maintain being merged via some > other maintainers' repositories. I may or may not have also given my > Reviewed-by in this case, which alone is not an approval to merge via > other trees. Interesting. When I give a Reviewed-by: to a patch, I am most definitely letting it be merged into other trees. For anything I pull in, I don't add a Reviewed-by and will strip any tag that says I did review it as my Signed-off-by includes that I reviewed the patch. The difference I give between Acked-by and Reviewed-by is that my Acked-by is "I don't see anything wrong with the idea of the change, and it can go via another tree", where as a Reviewed-by is "I took time to understand the change itself, and have not found anything wrong with it". Basically, an Acked-by is "I took a quick look, and I'm OK with it, but if it breaks something of mine, I expect you to fix it." and Reviewed-by is "I took a deeper look, and if it breaks something of mine, I hold myself at fault, and will fix it myself". ;-) -- Steve
