Re: [PATCH] spi: bcm53xx: (re)license code to the GPL v2

[Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 30 December 2016 at 05:30, Han Jingoo <jingoohan1@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Thank you for sending me the patch.
> Your patch looks good.
>
> But, I am not a maintainer for this bcm53xx SPI driver.
> So, I think that my reviewed-by is enough, instead of my acked-by.
> However, you can select either one.
>
> Reviewed-by: Jingoo Han <jingoohan1@xxxxxxxxx>
> or
> Acked-by: Jingoo Han <jingoohan1@xxxxxxxxx>

According to the Documentation/development-process/5.Posting.rst this
"Acked-by" is *often* used by maintainers, but it isn't a requirement.
It also "indicates an agreement" which should be clear enough for
(re)licensing code. So I think it's justified to use "Acked-by" in
this case. I can also see similar usage of it in "git log" of kernel
source so I hope it's really OK :)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-spi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html