Re: Proposal: Add review tags to patch review workflow.

On 10/10/2022 15:14, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2022 14:31:54 +0200
>> Cc: [email protected], [email protected]
>> From: Bruno Larsen <[email protected]>
>>
>> On 10/10/2022 13:27, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>>>> Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2022 12:11:46 +0200
>>>> Cc: [email protected], [email protected]
>>>> From: Bruno Larsen <[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".
>>> I don't mind either way.  This whole thing is a service to others, so
>>> I'll do whatever people prefer.  Let me just point out that my
>>> situation is not too unique: several other maintainers can approve
>>> only parts of patches.
>> Ah, so I'll suggest that you approve the documentation changes, and I'll
>> mention that some approvers may sometimes only approve part of the
>> patch, so one should make sure the whole patch is approved before pushing.
> I'm not sure I understand: do you mean that I should not use _any_ tag
> at all, when the patch includes more than just documentation?

Sorry for making things even more confusing. I meant that you use 
Approved-by tags.

What I was getting at was that the wording I have been using until this 
point was "if you get any Approved-by, it is ready for pushing", and 
that needs to be changed to "be sure that you have received Approved-by 
for all the code, in case a maintainer only approved parts of your 
change", or something of the sorts. Still working on that...

Cheers,
Bruno