Re: Acked-by: [was: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] enter.c: Use wmem*() functions with] wide-character strings

Greg KH <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.mail.mutt.devel
Message-ID <2026021444-dumpster-until-a1e0@gregkh>
On Sat, Feb 14, 2026 at 05:26:34PM +0100, Rene Kita wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 14, 2026 at 05:03:59PM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Sat, Feb 14, 2026 at 04:22:53PM +0100, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
> > > This improves readability, and makes it more type safe (wmemcpy(3)
> > > doesn't use void*).
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Alejandro Colomar <[email protected]>
> > > Cherry-picked-from: neomutt.git 7df621a105e2 (2024-05-09; "Use wmem*() functions with wide-character strings")
> > > [alx: Adapted diff to mutt; changed commit message]
> > > Cc: Greg KH <[email protected]>
> > > Signed-off-by: Alejandro Colomar <[email protected]>
> > 
> > Don't know if we are doing acks, but if so:
> > 
> > Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>
> 
> As we are just going back to working with patches on the ML I would
> suspect that we are not doing acks.
> 
> But, should we? I know how it works, but what is it good for?

It shows that someone else reviewed and agreed with it.  We use it in
kernel development to be a "less than" type of comment compared to
"Reviewed-by:".  Which really, I should have given here as I did review
the thing :)

> I guess it might make sense in big projects where some domain expert
> can ack a patch and the BDFL then sees it's OK to apply. I don't see
> that necessity for mutt.

Hey, that's fine, but it's always good to get others to review stuff if
possible, right?

thanks,

greg k-h
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.