From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4281E3858CDA for ; Mon, 26 Sep 2022 13:55:25 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 4281E3858CDA Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=simark.ca Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=simark.ca Received: from [10.0.0.11] (unknown [217.28.27.60]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 523CC1E0D5; Mon, 26 Sep 2022 09:55:24 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=simark.ca; s=mail; t=1664200524; bh=RzZwoIAvvFHxeH5ZBBPZ+3ajxNhTx7/61qHSJG+O870=; h=Date:Subject:To:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=F/BYJHMabaRvS/GxQlzJlQsgALunnBoCMvBq/nqvrmhLW1pCKOGTLGElfQxCdtcy5 U+FNS2+lthg2bXu/uezH/H/qjnztgrOc9XCM3RkX+zomfRFJhuKquVA+LqpTo8xFIr TUCC5prg8/RoIth6TxnOBkn3RzuwMKkhDOq4P8PQ= Message-ID: <453759b1-1ddf-1aff-a033-6183b84a4a4d@simark.ca> Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2022 09:55:23 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.2.2 Subject: Re: Proposal: Add review tags to patch review workflow. Content-Language: en-US To: Bruno Larsen , gdb@sourceware.org References: From: Simon Marchi In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: 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! Simon