Re: Patch review workflow [was: patchwork.sourceware.org is live!]
Thomas Schwinge <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lib.glibc.alpha,gmane.comp.gdb.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Hi! By the way, I suggest that the patch review workflow is kept in sync as much as possible between all projects using the <http://patchwork.sourceware.org/> instance, so that we don't have to remember too many deviations. Does Siddhesh's proposal (quoted below) as well as <https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/Patch%20Review%20Workflow> generally make sense for GDB, too? On Tue, 27 May 2014 08:49:04 +0200, I wrote: > On Mon, 26 May 2014 15:33:58 +0530, Siddhesh Poyarekar <[email protected]> wrote: > > I > > have proposed a new state of 'Committed' that reflects that the patch > > has been committed to git, a state different from being accepted by a > > reviewer. > > Makes sense, as the action of committing may be the submitter's, > reviewer's, or someone else's. > > > I have also marked some states in green - those are states that should > > effectively close the patch. I just found out that I can mark states > > as 'Need Action' and figured that all states except those marked in > > green could be marked as such in patchwork. > > > > So in summary, the proposals are: > > > > 1. Add a new 'Committed' state > > 2. Mark the 'Accepted' as 'Needs Action' so that it shows up in the > > pending patches list. > > Sounds good to me. Grüße, Thomas
signature.asc
(application/pgp-signature, 472 B)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJThDZzAAoJEK3/DN1sMFFt+9IH/2zCevTIGeUOAoNsOkBOmsFu q/7EP9zKnjbK3Kgp/ZxkKHbqv5m7dYs0S9tyOeqVUi6BOqTyk8nuqz1Kfc+NNpPF ghmOTM9ivk3t9F7/OL/i6XZ455kHflhVoYCiBtrNfZhD3Z1fQagGtui67w62BPI/ PIU03NH7jr3n1EC4u4odj4QjuRscTFazOfwtv/Go0791HdP9/HjhVJwpxEhpY62L M5kAtEPv4KE0ibplj70IhH6mW9fchWUcLY2wpRdVmio6Jt7AegEaWOOdl4XRpTLD /1ux0FaHjQCq5t3rFHSq8i6TBdtYEVDYVOeu+L7fMmbqzEUpMe9/Y8lpwFV6/3k= =BhGo -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----