[Mesa-dev] [PATCH v4 09/10] gallium: swr: Added swr build for windows

[Ilia Mirkin]

On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 11:10 AM, Kyriazis, George
<george.kyriazis at intel.com> wrote:
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: mesa-dev [mailto:mesa-dev-bounces at lists.freedesktop.org] On
>> Behalf Of Emil Velikov
>> Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2016 10:02 AM
>> To: Ilia Mirkin <imirkin at alum.mit.edu>
>> Cc: Kyriazis, George <george.kyriazis at intel.com>; ML mesa-dev <mesa-
>> dev at lists.freedesktop.org>
>> Subject: Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH v4 09/10] gallium: swr: Added swr build for
>> windows
>>
>> On 23 November 2016 at 15:39, Ilia Mirkin <imirkin at alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>> > On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 10:20 AM, Kyriazis, George
>> > <george.kyriazis at intel.com> wrote:
>> >> Thanks Emil,
>> >>
>> >> One thing that I am clear about is: what is the difference between
>> Reviewed-by:, Acked-by:, etc.  It sounds like they do the same thing,
>> however in the documentation they are worded as if they mean different
>> things.
>> >
>> > Reviewed-by = I am familiar with this code, and I have carefully
>> > looked over your change and am fairly sure that it will work properly
>> > Acked-by = I glanced at the change and it seems reasonable OR I looked
>> > carefully at the change, but am not overly familiar with the
>> > surrounding code
>> >
>> Exactly this. Thanks Ilia!
>>
> Thanks!  In the docs there is also a reference to "Signed-off-by".  Thoughts on that one?

That one's a little trickier - in the Linux Kernel, it has real significance -

https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/SubmittingPatches#n420

However as we have no comparable document in the mesa tree, it loses
some of its luster. I think a lot of mesa hackers are also kernel
hackers, and the practice has sort of flowed over. There's no hard
rule about it though.

Cheers,

  -ilia