Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH]: minios: don't retrieve the address of void variable

[Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 2011-01-11 at 17:01 +0000, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Ian Jackson, le Tue 11 Jan 2011 16:43:55 +0000, a Ãcrit :
> > Samuel Thibault writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH]: minios: don't retrieve 
> > the address of void variable"):
> > > And my signed-off-by was mostly to express that I have completely
> > > checked the patch and give my formal approval on it for inclusion. My
> > > former acked-by, as expressed: in SubmittingPatches: Ãis not as
> > > formal as Signed-off-by:.  It is a record that the acker has at least
> > > reviewed the patch and has indicated acceptance. [...] Acked-by: does
> > > not necessarily indicate acknowledgement of the entire patch.Ã, i.e. it
> > > looked good to me without giving so formal approval.
> > 
> > Yes, I think if you meant "I like this patch and think it should be
> > committed" then Acked-by is correct.
> 
> Well, in Linux Signed-off-by is also used in that case, e.g. when Andrew
> Morton applies a patch to his tree (he actually almost never uses
> Acked-by: 33 overs 30164 in my checkout, I doubt he has acually worked
> on all these).

That's the 

       (c) The contribution was provided directly to me by some other
           person who certified (a), (b) or (c) and I have not modified
           it.

case in the DCO, it's intend to track chain of submission via
maintainers and similar situations. AIUI the subtle distinction is
whether you are taking responsibility for forwarding on someone else's
work or are just commenting on it as it goes past.

Ian.

> 
> Samuel
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel