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

"Kevin J. McCarthy" <[email protected]> Mon, 16 Feb 2026 17:22:39 +0800

Newsgroups	gmane.mail.mutt.devel
Message-ID	<aZLh34gcXRJQa_5i@qinghai>

On Mon, Feb 16, 2026 at 08:54:42AM +0100, Rene Kita wrote:
>On Sun, Feb 15, 2026 at 11:02:21AM +0000, Crystal Kolipe via Mutt-dev wrote:
>> On Sat, Feb 14, 2026 at 07:41:16PM -0500, Kurt Hackenberg wrote:
>> > I've never heard of acked-by -- what I just read here is all I know -- but
>> > offhand, I think it's overkill for a project of Mutt's moderate size. Two
>> > levels of formal review and bookkeeping seems like more than Mutt needs.
>>
>> It is an overkill.
>>
>> We don't need a rigid framework and policy.  That's part of the advantage of
>> moving back to a free-form mailing list development environment.
>>
>> The commit messages can just include, "discussed by ...", "tested by ...", or
>> whatever is relevant to the size and complexity of the patch.
>
>That's pretty much what I think. The pros given in this thread could not
>convince me that it is worth the extra work.
>
>But as Kevin is the only one doing commits right now, it's up to him, I
>guess. I would just hate it if I would have to do it.

Yeah, I think overkill is a good word for it.  There's nothing wrong 
with it, but I'm not anxious to spend my time trying to manage trailers.

If people submit patches with trailers, I'll leave them in, but right 
now I'm happy with keeping things as they've been the past few years, 
with simple mentions in the commit message.

-- 
Kevin J. McCarthy
GPG Fingerprint: 8975 A9B3 3AA3 7910 385C  5308 ADEF 7684 8031 6BDA

signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 833 B)