From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx2.freebsd.org (mx2.freebsd.org [96.47.72.81]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9E2283858D37 for ; Mon, 26 Sep 2022 21:32:41 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 9E2283858D37 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=FreeBSD.org Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [96.47.72.80]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)) (Client CN "mx1.freebsd.org", Issuer "R3" (verified OK)) by mx2.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4Mbwvs1RYyz3LDS; Mon, 26 Sep 2022 21:32:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from smtp.freebsd.org (smtp.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::24b:4]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.freebsd.org", Issuer "R3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4Mbwvs0Xc9z3s9w; Mon, 26 Sep 2022 21:32:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=freebsd.org; s=dkim; t=1664227961; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=zE6X04EufuXDYohS/Tt9ocDNwBe+UF9+IkMCoSoH6KQ=; b=gFTQ0QFV9t1w9QC/iJJi/JFfsGDDUSpELBACZ0xAbr8yMC429PdExuaWjDO6r4Z132RTLx kgzStCuNzvuBrNdlbylpr8Skg2VuZtZUPSkFr5Pj2RArDeJS5rEUzGAxjFhX4Jzlmnftvo KlwAcSnaaDCFqGk28dApp38rWGeaA/Bj7r3eNkhEBpiD+UO98I4I6gguIPWA2YrYdYQMms NssD+0mbNIhY6ucLCyOVoFZNtMjbu7zgaOw9DaGxtFTeGeTQUQEvfB9nheqFL1BsOv6HIn 1j9czpyvaKDm+0J00MVYoHa99BwLF/D0dyVlBd/s5rB63oUBB4Of6II2XP3qWA== Received: from [10.0.1.4] (ralph.baldwin.cx [66.234.199.215]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) (Authenticated sender: jhb) by smtp.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4Mbwvr1dzDzjWZ; Mon, 26 Sep 2022 21:32:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: <4c321d90-ca45-c3dd-27dc-cc8c74b6e999@FreeBSD.org> Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2022 14:32:38 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.13.1 Subject: Re: Proposal: Add review tags to patch review workflow. Content-Language: en-US To: Simon Marchi , Bruno Larsen , gdb@sourceware.org References: <453759b1-1ddf-1aff-a033-6183b84a4a4d@simark.ca> From: John Baldwin In-Reply-To: <453759b1-1ddf-1aff-a033-6183b84a4a4d@simark.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=freebsd.org; s=dkim; t=1664227961; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=zE6X04EufuXDYohS/Tt9ocDNwBe+UF9+IkMCoSoH6KQ=; b=A9frkyRN1XD0F21xscCiOU3qtVdCQYMg47BZ1SSBbv50Sw4tE0ZrNJ7ktU6soPFVWx4wpZ LOFfxCU33vJm0IyRs7VyixT0H7r3sr1GvG87IbYPlw0odiCDLcAiyl7wSjOoASdJ/tDKbS JRPStFCOSvWHzLIjayvN65H/zEZldclaJHvopKddWhydUnwsXlJbNeXupK+l88Q3ZVxIEj MMSl/TdQdnFngVmw1gnkZ7AhverrrMyaZK+uadSnCifgSJsVVPyfNeup05oQG+l2OmpQJj Vcvjmm9qcfkBGhh0eoPHI3sdbiUD0Ol6/cFfisz/etH6BHRbROJMKlSu0wd5tg== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=dkim; d=freebsd.org; t=1664227961; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=lKpoKuRiLRGj1cDt4rYiMUZbJ+smu7WeS6KS85ZfQ2HMlzhl6+s9FFjmmm0loQT/KVlmTW zOIWBiXV3pDuA1nVMq9GVTO2VF2ZmZTyJU3tB06mxsbRxYrzWMI1mrNgSSXa+T9M0RP4a7 mxtYszCKXF0YNrbhtA1DyOq0/h1d9sVJpzl26ZBDbTzgFoSFWQdjrGQ644Ljaw754+RRIX ApA+7k2el50TDC8mKGTCnCInF9hdpW+COsnzPTlHQu1bOvHEPHf7qXPBhICGoZiMmPiFDu hMg4z4/DgPUo6FeOQpFTrmIMwm/IkDoUBp0YcF2qGkImiildB1rwu58oUFbjzA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx1.freebsd.org; none X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,NICE_REPLY_A,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,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 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. 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?) -- John Baldwin