From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Sun May 13 12:19:40 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FFA516A405; Sun, 13 May 2007 12:19:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org) Received: from cyrus.watson.org (cyrus.watson.org [209.31.154.42]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0139913C44B; Sun, 13 May 2007 12:19:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org) Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [209.31.154.41]) by cyrus.watson.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8256B470F6; Sun, 13 May 2007 08:19:39 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 13 May 2007 13:19:39 +0100 (BST) From: Robert Watson X-X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org To: "Wojciech A. Koszek" In-Reply-To: <200705130236.l4D2afwt015566@repoman.freebsd.org> Message-ID: <20070513131603.C73427@fledge.watson.org> References: <200705130236.l4D2afwt015566@repoman.freebsd.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/conf Makefile.amd64 Makefile.arm Makefile.i386 Makefile.ia64 Makefile.pc98 Makefile.powerpc Makefile.sparc64 Makefile.sun4v src/usr.sbin/config configvers.h X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 13 May 2007 12:19:40 -0000 On Sun, 13 May 2007, Wojciech A. Koszek wrote: > Log: > Bump config(8) version and build requirement for config(8) to 600006. This > is caused by my latest changes to config(8). You're supposed to install new > config(8) in order to prevent yourself from seeing a warning about old > version of that tool. > > You should configure the kernel with a new config(8) then. > > Oked by: rwatson, cognet (mentor) In typical FreeBSD parlance, we use one or both of: Reviewed by: whomever Approved by: whomever The former states that the persons(s) in question have at least read, and possibly also tested, the changes, and is vouching for their reasonableness. The latter states that the person(s) in question have authorized a commit, typically in the role of a subsystem maintainer, mentor, release engineer, or security officer. Sometimes it comes in the form: Approved by: re (whomever) Approved by: security-officer (whomever) Approved by: whomever (mentor) I don't claim that this is consistent. :-) I've noticed an increasing number of "OKed" commits lately -- I'd prefer it if we stuck to our existing nomenclature with respect to how we annotate changes with respect to review and approval. Among other things, it makes the commit messages more mechanically parseable, and avoids ambiguity. Robert N M Watson Computer Laboratory University of Cambridge > > Revision Changes Path > 1.23 +1 -1 src/sys/conf/Makefile.amd64 > 1.32 +1 -1 src/sys/conf/Makefile.arm > 1.272 +1 -1 src/sys/conf/Makefile.i386 > 1.68 +1 -1 src/sys/conf/Makefile.ia64 > 1.174 +1 -1 src/sys/conf/Makefile.pc98 > 1.284 +1 -1 src/sys/conf/Makefile.powerpc > 1.39 +1 -1 src/sys/conf/Makefile.sparc64 > 1.2 +1 -1 src/sys/conf/Makefile.sun4v > 1.45 +1 -1 src/usr.sbin/config/configvers.h >