dougsland

From: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...>
To: v4l-dvb maintainer list <v4l-dvb-maintainer@...>

At KS/2007, it were agreed that SOB should be accepted only from the
developer from whose you've receipt the patch. Other reviews should use,
instead, Reviewed-by: or Acked-by: tags. Reviewed-by: is stronger, since
it means that somebody else had reviewed the changes at the source code,
or tested, while acked-by: can simply mean that somebody is not against
a patch. Other core developers are already replacing SOB: by
reviewed-by: tags.

The idea behind is to use the following logic:

Signed-off-by: - should be used by the author(s) and the trees for what
the patch passed. A maintainer should add this tag to confirm that he
received a patch by its author or from a sub-subsystem tree (in fact,
sometimes, this tag is abused);

Acked-by: - this simply means that you aren't against some patch;

Reviewed-by: - It means that somebody that are not at the direct
forwarding way of a patch has reviewed and/or tested a patch.

So, in this case, as Trent sent the patch directly to you (even I'm
being C/C), I should use either acked-by (if I'm just ok with this) or
reviewed-by. As I've reviewed the source code, reviewed-by is the better
option.

Also, subsystem maintainers are asked to require at least one
reviewed-by by patch. The idea is to stimulate the community to review
changesets and improve the overall quality of the kernel.