Re: [PATCH] doc: correct command formatting

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Sep 29, 2017, 04:07 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqpoaaxi4e.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <20170929032653.GA28303@aiede.mtv.corp.google.com>

Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> writes:

Show 8 quoted lines

> Separate from this example: yes, I think adopting Linux's Reviewed-by
> convention would be a good thing.  When I see a positive reply to a
> patch, I often wonder whether an ack or a fuller reviewed-by is
> intended, and Linux's way of formalizing that appeals to me.
>
> I'll try sending a patch to add it to SubmittingPatches tomorrow
> morning (Stefan had also been hinting recently about this being
> something worth trying).

Thanks.

I agree with the goal of educating list participants not to throw
Reviewed-by: without reading the patches too carelessly.  As akpm
once said in <20121003143200.69a50aad.akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Looks ok to me from a quick look" is not a review.

    > > No, lib/lzo has no identifiable maintainer.  I suggest you proceed as
    > > follows:
    > > 
    > > - Post the entire patch series to lkml for review (I'd like a cc please)
    > 
    > Already happened, multiple people reviewed and tested.

    um, I would not consider "Looks ok to me from a quick look." and "I
    couldn't tell from the github view, but I assume you follow standard
    coding style." to indicate a rigorous code review!

    That's the problem with the git presentation: hardly anyone reads the
    patches and there is no patch for a reviewer to reply to.

    So please send the patches out for review.  One at a time, via email.