Hi, On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 7:58 AM, Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazz...@free-electrons.com> wrote: [..] >> Other projects have different policies for their tagging (some require 3 >> acks, for example), which will introduce a little complexity there too, >> but that's not insurmountable either. > > Another thing that comes to mind is that not all Acked-by or Tested-by > are equal, I believe. An Acked-by from a well-known long-time > contributor will not be seen with the same level of trust that an > Acked-by from an unknown newcomer. Do we want to add a mechanism of > "rating"? But that would mean the project maintainer would have to > "rate" developers, which is not nice. Or maybe just a list of e-mails > that the project's maintainer considers as trustworthy, and only those > ones would be taken into account when displaying the ART flags? > > Or maybe it doesn't matter too much, since in the vast majority of > cases, only well-known long-time contributors are doing reviews/acks.
Patchwork already has the concept of maintainers, that is a list of people having patchwork change privileges. Maybe it is sufficient to differentiate Acked/Reviewed/Tested from either maintainer or non-maintainer? It would not require additional administration. Best regards, Thomas _______________________________________________ Patchwork mailing list Patchwork@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/patchwork