On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 4:41 PM Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 2:29 PM Neal Gompa <neal@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > As my Acked-by was removed, I'm sorry to say that there is no point > > for me to provide feedback since it is unwanted. > > > > I hope it lands soon, but I also hope the people here who decided that > > a person's efforts aren't worth recording because they don't > > personally know them should reflect on this too. It's a good way to > > keep people from coming into the community for the long term. > > Hopefully this reply helps -- apologies to anyone if I am overstepping. > > On one side, it is true that Acked-by is typically used by people that > is responsible for the code one way or another, because the tag is > meant for them to acknowledge they are OK with the change going in, > and so I can see the argument that restricting it for that purpose > only may help avoid confusion later on reading the log. > > On the other hand, someone being willing to put their name on a patch > is very valuable, whoever they are, and whatever the tag name is. > Moreover, it is also true that, Acked-by may be used here in a "as a > key user downstream, this looks reasonable and satisfies our needs" > sense. > > Finally, sometimes new tags are invented on the fly because there is > no good fit, too. > > Either way, I don't think anyone wanted to disregard your efforts or > to be rude to you in particular, but rather wanted to keep tags usage > aligned to how they view them or how they use them in their subsystem. > The Tested-by was still wanted, so I doubt their goal was to remove > you from the log or to make you feel unwelcomed. Thank you for putting this more eloquently than I could, Miguel. Neal, I do appreciate your feedback, and I'm sorry if I didn't make it clear enough in my previous emails. I would very much welcome your Tested-by, or another suitable tag that's acceptable to both you and Masahiro. Sami
