Re: [PATCH] doc: correct command formatting

Junio C Hamano wrote:

Jonathan Nieder [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

Andreas Heiduk wrote:

quoted

quoted

+1, Thanks for spotting.

Thanks for looking it over.  Can we add your Reviewed-by?  (See [1]
for what this means.)

I would just do "Acked-by: Andreas" after seeing such an obvious
admission of guilt & appreciation for fixing in the exchange.

Oh!  I had missed that context.

Your instinct would have been right (and is born out by Andreas's
reply to me).

I was just fishing, but in this context there was no reason to fish
for more than the Ack that was already there.

Would we rather want to make it more formal like how Linux folks do
the Reviewed-by: thing?

Separate from this example: yes, I think adopting Linux's Reviewed-by
convention would be a good thing.  When I see a positive reply to a
patch, I often wonder whether an ack or a fuller reviewed-by is
intended, and Linux's way of formalizing that appeals to me.

I'll try sending a patch to add it to SubmittingPatches tomorrow
morning (Stefan had also been hinting recently about this being
something worth trying).

Thank you,
Jonathan