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 10/10/2022 11:47, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2022 11:27:03 +0200 >> Cc: [email protected] >> From: Bruno Larsen <[email protected]> >> >> As Simon mentioned, there weren't big changes, but here's a quick cookbook: > Thanks! > >> 1. If you have the authority to approve a patch and believe the patch >> you are reviewing is ready to be merged, add the following line to your >> e-mail (usually at the end): Approved-by: Your Name <[email protected]> >> >> 2. If you don't have the authority to approve patches, or aren't >> convinced that you know enough about the area of code to fully approve a >> patch for merging, and haven't found any technical issues (i.e. >> non-nitpicks) with the patch, add the following line to your e-mail: >> Reviewed-by: Your Name <[email protected]> >> >> 3. If you aren't sure of the quality of the technical changes, but you >> have tested and verified that the patch does not add any regressions, >> add the following line to your e-mail: Tested-by: Your Name >> <[email protected]> > I'm not clear what I should do when I approve just part of a patch. > It is frequently the case that a patch includes both code and > documentation, and I'm approving just the documentation part(s). Is > that item 1 or item 2? or something else? > It's a bit up to you, if I'm honest. I would default to telling you to use Reviewed-by, to avoid confusion, but if you want to say that the "documentation parts are Approved-by", I am fine with it. Just let me know if you decide to go with the second, so I can mention in the wiki something like "make sure all of your patch is approved before pushing". Cheers, Bruno