On Sat, May 18, 2019 at 07:38:34AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > "- Acked-by: indicates an agreement by another developer (often a > maintainer of the relevant code) that the patch is appropriate for > inclusion into the kernel." > > And I, as a developer (and not a Maintainer in this case) do indicate > that this patch is appropriate for inclusion into the kernel. > > Reviewed-by has stronger connotations and implies I have in-depth > knowledge of the subsystem/driver AND agree to the Reviewer's > Statement. I use Acked-by in this case as a weaker agreement after a > shallow review of the patch based on its merits alone. Note the "often a maintainer of the relevant code" bit. And "appropriate for inclusion into the kernel" means to me that you've done the same level of review as Reviewed-by. So I have very different understanding of how Acked-by and Reviewed-by than you do. That being said, no offence to you, but any kind of Acked-by or Reviewed-by from you is not going to have as much weight as say, a Reviewed-by: from someone like Jan Kara. That's just because I don't have a good sense to your technical ability, and so I'd be doing a full review myself and not rely on your review at all.... Cheers, - Ted P.S. And if I find a problem in the patch, and someone had attached their Acked-by or Reviewed-by to it, it would have the same negative hit to their reputation either way. Not a big deal if it happens only once, or it's an esepcially tricky issue, but it if happens more than once or is really blatent, I as the maintainer definitely do remember.
