Re: Proposal: Add review tags to patch review workflow.
Bruno Larsen via Gdb <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.gdb.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 26/09/2022 23:32, John Baldwin wrote: > On 9/26/22 6:55 AM, Simon Marchi via Gdb wrote: >> >> >> On 2022-09-21 07:04, Bruno Larsen via Gdb wrote: >>> TL;DR: I want to introduce the usage of 3 new review tags to the GDB >>> patch review workflow. They are: Reviewed-by, Approved-by and >>> Tested-by. >> >> Hi Bruno, >> >> I completely agree with the proposal. I really like the fact that it >> makes communication less ambiguous. Following some process (or changing >> the process) can feel a bit heavy for long-timers, but I think it makes >> things much clearer for newcomers. >> >> Assuming we will go through with this proposal, it will need to be >> documented on the wiki so we can easily refer people to the procedure. >> Probably the ContributionChecklist page? >> >> https://sourceware.org/gdb/wiki/ContributionChecklist >> >> Will you be able to take care of this when needed (do you have write >> access to the wiki)? >> >> In the mean time, message to others: please let us know if you agree >> with this, it's difficult to know we have the support of the community >> if everybody silently agrees! > > I'm fine with the idea. I'm less worried about "credit" for reviewing > personally, and the suggested format seems a tad verbose perhaps vs > just formalizing "Approved", but it's probably good to have it be a bit > different from straight prose to be more explicit. Hi John, Thanks for your input! While it is a bit verbose, I didn't find it to be a problem when reading through commits that used it (on other projects) because of the tag-like formatting. It's quick and easy to identify and skip through it when looking through the commit history, and easy to automate the emitting from the reviewer side. > > It also wasn't clear to me if the intention was for the commits to > be amended with the annotations? (I don't think it was explicitly > stated in the original mail, and I'm not sure if it was an implicit > assumption?) No, I didn't intend on amending previous commits. The main problem this change intends to solve is fixing ambiguity, and the pushed patches don't have that issue anymore. Thanking a reviewer is just one more positive side (IMHO) going forward. Cheers, Bruno