[M] Change in openvpn[master]: Start a new document CODE_CHECKLIST

"flichtenheld \(Code Review\) via Openvpn-devel" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.network.openvpn.devel
Message-ID <e7cd1b9e029076519b2dab864a774a80ca352f4b-EmailReplacePatchSet-HTML@gerrit.openvpn.net>
Attention is currently required from: flichtenheld, plaisthos, razvanc.

Hello plaisthos, razvanc, 

I'd like you to reexamine a change. Please visit

    http://gerrit.openvpn.net/c/openvpn/+/1776?usp=email

to look at the new patch set (#2).

The following approvals got outdated and were removed:
Code-Review+2 by razvanc

The change is no longer submittable: Code-Review and checks~ChecksSubmitRule are unsatisfied now.


Change subject: Start a new document CODE_CHECKLIST
......................................................................

Start a new document CODE_CHECKLIST

This is intended to document in one place all the policies
applicable to submitted changes. This serves multiple
purposes:

* Make it clearer to submitters what is required of them
* Make it clearer what to consider automating when developing
  (be it by writing scripts or by instructing an AI agent)
* Reduce the bus factor of the project by reducing the amount
  of things only stored in Gert's head

Change-Id: Ib123b7bf58317a1be5af1a1d45decb8f31f2ec68
Signed-off-by: Frank Lichtenheld <[email protected]>
---
A CODE_CHECKLIST.md
M Makefile.am
2 files changed, 116 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)


  git pull ssh://gerrit.openvpn.net:29418/openvpn refs/changes/76/1776/2

diff --git a/CODE_CHECKLIST.md b/CODE_CHECKLIST.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..dcccf6d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/CODE_CHECKLIST.md
@@ -0,0 +1,115 @@
+# Checklist for Contributions
+
+## Introduction
+
+This documents all policies applied to any change that should be applied
+in this repository. It is separated in two parts. The first part describes
+the parts of the checklist that any submitter should check. The seconds part
+describes the parts that integrators need to check before actually merging the
+change.
+
+In general the Integrator Checklist does imply that all checks from the
+Submitter Checklist have been passed. They are not repeated.
+
+## Submitter Checklist
+
+### Commit message
+
+* Does the commit message acurately describe the change?
+* Does it end with the line `Signed-off-by: My Name <[email protected]>` ?
+
+### Automated tests
+
+* Did the change pass a local `make` build?
+* Did the change pass a local run of `make check`?
+* Have you verified the code formatting with clang-format?
+* Is the code covered by Unit Tests? If not, have you considered adding
+  a new Unit Test?
+
+### Change-specific checks
+
+* Does your change require adaptions on both server and client side
+  because it changes the wire-protocol?
+  * Did you propose a change to http://github.com/openvpn-rfc/
+    to agree on the protocol format changes?
+* Does your change add, remove, or change a config option?
+  * Have you adapted the usage text (`openvpn --help`)?
+  * Have you adapted the man page text (`man -l ./doc/openvpn.8`)?
+* Have you reviewed all code comments around code you touched to
+  check whether they need to be adapted?
+* If your change adds new files, are they added in some Makefile.am
+  statement that will make sure they up in the distributed source
+  tarballs?
+
+## Integrator Checklist
+
+### General
+
+* Is the exact code change to be merged available as an email on openvpn-devel
+  mailing list (note: this does not apply to the commit message since that needs
+  to be massaged anyway)?
+* If not, is the change to merge a trivial cherry-pick?
+
+### Commit message
+
+* Does it contain the pointer to the email on openvpn-devel?
+  This means a line `Message-Id: <actual msg id>` and a line
+  `URL: <url to mail-archive.com copy of the mail>`. If mail-archive.com
+  is not working, alternatively an URL to SourceForge's mail archive
+  is also acceptable.
+* Does it contain at least one `Acked-by` line from a known OpenVPN
+  core developer? Valid sources for `Acked-by` lines are mails on
+  the mailing list or +2 votes in Gerrit.
+* If the change is a security fix, does it contain a `CVE:` line in
+  the format `CVE: <Year>-<Number>`?
+* If the change fixes a Github issue, does it contain a line
+  `Github: OpenVPN/openvpn#<Number>`? (Other repositories might
+  also be referenced if applicable)
+* Have you considered adding a `Reported-by:` line? This is usual
+  for attribution for security issues but might be added for any
+  report where the reporter added significant value by his report.
+* If doing a cherry-pick, have you made sure to use `git cherry-pick -x`
+  to add a reference to the picked commit?
+
+#### Gerrit specific
+
+Additional checks if the change was reviewed and submitted via Gerrit.
+
+* Does it contain a correct `Gerrit URL:` line? (This is generally ensured
+  by using `gerrit-send-email.py`)
+* Is the `Change-Id:` line present and located in the last paragraph of the
+  message? (If not in the last paragraph, Gerrit will ignore it)
+
+### Automated tests
+
+* Has the change passed a full build run in buildbot? (Usually ensured via
+  Gerrit). This ensures the following points (which otherwise might need to
+  be considered separately):
+  * Build passes on multiple platforms (Linux, FreeBSD, Windows, macOS, other BSDs)
+  * Build passes with multiple compilers (GCC, Clang, MSVC, GCC MinGW)
+  * Build passes with multiple configurations (`--enable-small`, `--disable-management`,
+    etc.)
+  * Build passes with multiple versions of multiple SSL libraries (OpenSSL, mbedTLS)
+  * Unit tests pass in all these settings
+  * t\_server\_null, t\_client pass in all these settings
+  * t\_server passes
+  * Verified clang-format code formatting
+* If buildbot ignored the change that usually means that it did not match the
+  file match list (e.g. only changes in `.github/`). Consider whether that seems
+  correct.
+* Has the change passed a GHA run?
+* Do any of the tests actually excercise the code? If not, has someone other than the
+  submitter done any manual verification?
+
+### Backports
+
+* Is it clear to which branches the change should be applied?
+  * If it is a security fix, it should be applied to all branches that are
+    affected and that are not "unsupported"
+    (cf. https://community.openvpn.net/Pages/Supported%20versions)
+  * If it is a bugfix, it should be applied to all branches that are in
+    "Full stable support". Depending on the severity it might also be
+    applied to branches in "Old stable support".
+* Have you checked for all branches whether a trivial cherry-pick is
+  possible or whether a backport is required? If a backport is required
+  have you communicated this to the submitter?
diff --git a/Makefile.am b/Makefile.am
index 2df7eea..feeaabb 100644
--- a/Makefile.am
+++ b/Makefile.am
@@ -67,6 +67,7 @@
 	.gitignore \
 	.gitattributes \
 	CONTRIBUTING.rst \
+	CODE_CHECKLIST.md \
 	PORTS \
 	README.cmake.md \
 	README.dco.md \

-- 
To view, visit http://gerrit.openvpn.net/c/openvpn/+/1776?usp=email
To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit http://gerrit.openvpn.net/settings?usp=email

Gerrit-MessageType: newpatchset
Gerrit-Project: openvpn
Gerrit-Branch: master
Gerrit-Change-Id: Ib123b7bf58317a1be5af1a1d45decb8f31f2ec68
Gerrit-Change-Number: 1776
Gerrit-PatchSet: 2
Gerrit-Owner: flichtenheld <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Reviewer: plaisthos <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Reviewer: razvanc <[email protected]>
Gerrit-CC: openvpn-devel <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Attention: plaisthos <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Attention: flichtenheld <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Attention: razvanc <[email protected]>

_______________________________________________
Openvpn-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openvpn-devel
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.