From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 110253856961 for ; Wed, 17 May 2023 08:19:41 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 110253856961 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1684311580; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=afu3G6dLSZfksJL646TH2bYHeh7vxozid3VYe1uNl3A=; b=UePsveMGjs5yuKDda/rlXPvwedovs4c6ol5tFe8JU98jxJsxxdnv+THwS5NDSbyQVZd7X9 sR1YtZiLHh7KNo8n5d47RHFTHLUBqqDpi/QUALOwZZu1UaDAzBxjJL97VBabWLpx6xxaOX NfOkwBjI98pMOMi7F9nj6yWArv7K4YY= Received: from mail-qt1-f199.google.com (mail-qt1-f199.google.com [209.85.160.199]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-27-Nh7dWGBrOzG2JbDSP4FDpA-1; Wed, 17 May 2023 04:19:39 -0400 X-MC-Unique: Nh7dWGBrOzG2JbDSP4FDpA-1 Received: by mail-qt1-f199.google.com with SMTP id d75a77b69052e-3f38fe55146so3269521cf.3 for ; Wed, 17 May 2023 01:19:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1684311579; x=1686903579; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=afu3G6dLSZfksJL646TH2bYHeh7vxozid3VYe1uNl3A=; b=O5nVdHUesz23OrnyDBNa+de/KDuFPrOtsa9cNdV4kygOi9zDLCRayA3fb2+lo1/0gk nEqoFCbCtpG4YLvUTbbmSS3XzXKPFXsY/0v/28g6IFQeukeGfnrzq0gFfFlzfH0x3Vyt w7bh7kf7En6OeQ3nI1b9D7WaiwZ+FmtdOY4v90IPewTcDrBMg6XwS0shKLwJUG0vl2Dy ZABzEaK57MMD1SaqEPxNV8Rz4/ReYTpB0IpXnf1XiShekHrJZuvjWc/0n2zyZX70HJ+T 4SfhcrUZ1KwzSKRbbvKO/uMvcw2ZH8GlxvecEbXjULQoJFlqv0Xvw/O+VZRU3GvlURwq Oeqg== X-Gm-Message-State: AC+VfDwr8r5r4nnMPvYc+8QWqWAycWtHvMqqXwUocOqGigtDJ56KNAB/ Q1PXeJaxHVyPz2erswez2pgDhqaW09tI78WZIhRaXnbAvCY2E8y0+o8PjmVwKqaDgjrr/HUL0k5 mSkHp1lq3Wd4Vz1FglOyRkIppzj1oTA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:4c6:b0:3ef:3349:99cc with SMTP id q6-20020a05622a04c600b003ef334999ccmr60041178qtx.5.1684311579114; Wed, 17 May 2023 01:19:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACHHUZ7NWfTzY6knbNv7Y5LcFw88eGrjh+xqALNGyoXeiDQAykto4bM4AryXVzWa9WfawJ7wpz1aKA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:4c6:b0:3ef:3349:99cc with SMTP id q6-20020a05622a04c600b003ef334999ccmr60041165qtx.5.1684311578843; Wed, 17 May 2023 01:19:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.129] (ip-94-112-225-44.bb.vodafone.cz. [94.112.225.44]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g9-20020ac842c9000000b003f0a79e6a8bsm6886681qtm.28.2023.05.17.01.19.37 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 17 May 2023 01:19:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <71a08d05-ce55-ec44-2804-13145283ef6b@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 17 May 2023 10:19:35 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.10.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] [gdb]: add git trailer information on gdb/MAINTAINERS To: Eli Zaretskii , Simon Marchi Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, gdb@sourceware.org References: <20230516143826.3431583-1-blarsen@redhat.com> <20230516143826.3431583-2-blarsen@redhat.com> <83pm70z2hr.fsf@gnu.org> <83cz30yxox.fsf@gnu.org> <83728fde-a0e8-026b-d4d1-89975ff5ca28@simark.ca> <831qjfzo6n.fsf@gnu.org> From: Bruno Larsen In-Reply-To: <831qjfzo6n.fsf@gnu.org> X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,NICE_REPLY_A,RCVD_IN_BARRACUDACENTRAL,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,TXREP,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On 17/05/2023 04:28, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> Date: Tue, 16 May 2023 15:40:38 -0400 >> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, gdb@sourceware.org >> From: Simon Marchi >> >>> I don't think I'm in a position to put forward suggestions, since I'm >>> not sure I have a good understanding of the process. I only use >>> Approved-By when I can approve the entire patch, not just parts of it. >>> But maybe I'm wrong in that. You are affected by the process, you are absolutely in a position to put forward suggestions, especially for making it more straightforward! >> If this happens, I think it's fine to say "the documentation parts are >> approved" and following with your Approved-By. If you want to be >> extra-clear, add "but the rest needs to be approved by someone else". >> The patch will end up with multiple Approved-Bys. > I'd like to hear from more maintainers that this is how they see that > tag. My fear is that someone mechanically scans the discussion thread > for the tags, in which case human-readable qualifications will go > unnoticed. That's a fair point. My fear with using rb for partial approval was that if a patch needed 2 responsible maintainers to approve it, it might get stalled because it never got  an ab tag. We could have an extra tag like Partially-Approved-By (or Partial-Approval), but we would be the first project using it as far as I can see and that could make things confusing for people that already know the workflow. > > All in all, I feel that this aspect of our process is not well > defined. > > > Speaking of Acked-By, I felt the need to use it recently, where I just > > read the commit message, agreed with it, but didn't have time to review > > the code itself.  I wanted to show that I agreed with the intent of the > > patch.  I think that's what Acked-By is for.  I think we could add it to > > that list. My reading of the kernel's documentation of the tag[1] makes it sound like it is a partial approval, especially the lines: | 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.| And the only time I saw it used in QEMU seems to corroborate that reading. That said, I can be misunderstanding here (english is not my native language after all). [1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?id=HEAD#n441 -- Cheers, Bruno