From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+w=401wt.eu-S1758451AbYG1WDh@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1758451AbYG1WDh (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Mon, 28 Jul 2008 18:03:37 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754177AbYG1WDY
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Mon, 28 Jul 2008 18:03:24 -0400
Received: from namei.org ([69.55.235.186]:38343 "EHLO us.intercode.com.au"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1752739AbYG1WDX (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 28 Jul 2008 18:03:23 -0400
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 08:01:09 +1000 (EST)
From: James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>
X-X-Sender: jmorris@us.intercode.com.au
To: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com>
cc: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>, Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu>,
       Jon Smirl <jonsmirl@gmail.com>, Simon Arlott <simon@fire.lp0.eu>,
       lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: 463 kernel developers missing!
In-Reply-To: <20080728141414.d7e5def2.randy.dunlap@oracle.com>
Message-ID: <Xine.LNX.4.64.0807290751510.31732@us.intercode.com.au>
References: <9e4733910807280745l248801ebp134e77fc1ac70c02@mail.gmail.com>
 <488DF9CF.8020408@simon.arlott.org.uk> <9e4733910807281005y62dca90ar96f663908e644546@mail.gmail.com>
 <488DFD97.7080802@simon.arlott.org.uk> <9e4733910807281022v38d323c9sc7b63235824690f6@mail.gmail.com>
 <488E0BB6.7020006@simon.arlott.org.uk> <9e4733910807281119m10f9b6e3v98fc892a42476c86@mail.gmail.com>
 <488E1147.5040803@simon.arlott.org.uk> <9e4733910807281200m25f7f16bwa6678694bb25a61@mail.gmail.com>
 <20080728202236.GN9378@mit.edu> <20080728204624.GA11581@redhat.com>
 <20080728141414.d7e5def2.randy.dunlap@oracle.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Mon, 28 Jul 2008, Randy Dunlap wrote:

> It would be Good if we could give more value to Reviewed-by: tag lines also...
> 
> IOW, we "need" to do this.  :)

Also, Tested-by:, to encourage and recognize people who may not be 
confident in reviewing code to at least test it, which is immensely 
useful if done thoughtfully.

  "Measuring programming progress by lines of code is like measuring 
   aircraft building progress by weight."

If you know who said this, award yourself a cookie :-)


- James
-- 
James Morris
<jmorris@namei.org>