On 2/1/07, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ron minnich wrote: > > I'd like to repeat my previous question. Does acked imply committed? > > No, it should just mean that you agree with the patch and did not > modify it. Anybody can ack a patch. > > > How/when does the commit happen if someone does not have commit privs, > > e.g. if neither the signer or acker can commit? > > Someone steps up and commits? > > > Could we get a comment when people commit? > > Suggestion: > * The one who commits replies to the patch with "Applied." > * The commit mail is sent to the list automatically (already happens).
Signed-off-by: Some Guy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Acked-by: Some Gal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Applied-by: David H. Barr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> OR Commited-by: David H. Barr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Is there some blindingly obvious reason why one of these two wouldn't be appropriate? -dhbarr. -- linuxbios mailing list linuxbios@linuxbios.org http://www.openbios.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
