From: Andrew Morton Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2007 20:46:45 +0000 (-0700) Subject: document Acked-by: X-Git-Tag: v2.6.22-rc5~87 X-Git-Url: http://pilppa.com/gitweb/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=0f44cd23a5a2e26191a28ab6e91bd0c7849c8e0f;p=linux-2.6-omap-h63xx.git document Acked-by: Explain what we use Acked-by: for, and how it differs from Signed-off-by: Acked-by: Dave Jones Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds --- diff --git a/Documentation/SubmittingPatches b/Documentation/SubmittingPatches index d91125ab6f4..0958e97d4bf 100644 --- a/Documentation/SubmittingPatches +++ b/Documentation/SubmittingPatches @@ -340,8 +340,32 @@ now, but you can do this to mark internal company procedures or just point out some special detail about the sign-off. +13) When to use Acked-by: -13) The canonical patch format +The Signed-off-by: tag indicates that the signer was involved in the +development of the patch, or that he/she was in the patch's delivery path. + +If a person was not directly involved in the preparation or handling of a +patch but wishes to signify and record their approval of it then they can +arrange to have an Acked-by: line added to the patch's changelog. + +Acked-by: is often used by the maintainer of the affected code when that +maintainer neither contributed to nor forwarded the patch. + +Acked-by: is not as formal as Signed-off-by:. It is a record that the acker +has at least reviewed the patch and has indicated acceptance. Hence patch +mergers will sometimes manually convert an acker's "yep, looks good to me" +into an Acked-by:. + +Acked-by: does not necessarily indicate acknowledgement of the entire patch. +For example, if a patch affects multiple subsystems and has an Acked-by: from +one subsystem maintainer then this usually indicates acknowledgement of just +the part which affects that maintainer's code. Judgement should be used here. + When in doubt people should refer to the original discussion in the mailing +list archives. + + +14) The canonical patch format The canonical patch subject line is: