This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: patchwork.sourceware.org is live!
- From: Siddhesh Poyarekar <siddhesh dot poyarekar at gmail dot com>
- To: Andreas Jaeger <aj at suse dot com>
- Cc: Siddhesh Poyarekar <siddhesh at redhat dot com>, GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>, gdb at sourceware dot org, carlos at redhat dot com, fche at redhat dot com, gbenson at redhat dot com
- Date: Mon, 26 May 2014 12:59:16 +0530
- Subject: Re: patchwork.sourceware.org is live!
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20140523211338 dot GK12497 at spoyarek dot pnq dot redhat dot com> <5382E7F2 dot 4020506 at suse dot com>
On 26 May 2014 12:36, Andreas Jaeger <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> A patch that is merged, should have "Accepted", correct? so, patches
> that are already committed should be changed to have this...
> If i just comment on a patch with a "Looks fine", should I say "Under
> Review" - and then the submitter sets this to "Accepted"?
'Under Review' is a transitional state for a reviewer to 'take' a
patch off the queue for review.
We don't differentiate between review completion and commit; I guess
we should since the reviewer is not always responsible for commiting
the change. May I add an additional status 'Committed' to indicate
this? That way a reviewer sets 'Accepted' when the patch looks good
and the committer changes state to 'Committed' when the change is in
git. If the reviewer commits the change herself (i.e. when the
submitter does not have commit access), the former may set status to