Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2015 13:59:52 -0600 From: Bryan Drewery <bdrewery@FreeBSD.org> To: Steven Hartland <steven@multiplay.co.uk>, phabric-admin@FreeBSD.org Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, Randall Stewart <rrs@FreeBSD.org>, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bz@FreeBSD.org>, src-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Phabricator + 'Reviewed by' [was Re: svn commit: r278472 - in head/sys: netinet netinet6] Message-ID: <54DFA938.6020207@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <54DF6709.6030204@freebsd.org> References: <201502091928.t19JSC5P066293@svn.freebsd.org> <38B8D2D0-862A-4DF5-9479-8EC234CF830B@FreeBSD.org> <54DE8F32.2090500@FreeBSD.org> <54DF6709.6030204@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --71KaNec92cajp8T0dhVfr0IlJNwmc4jqa Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2/14/2015 9:17 AM, Steven Hartland wrote: >=20 > On 13/02/2015 23:56, Bryan Drewery wrote: >> On 2/9/2015 3:45 PM, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote: >>>> Commented upon by hiren and sbruno >>>> See Phabricator D1777 for more details. >>>> >>>> Commented upon by hiren and sbruno >>>> Reviewed by: adrian, jhb and bz >>> I have not reviewed this; as a matter of fact you are aware that I >>> still wanted to do that. >>> >> Something about Phabricator is not jiving with our commit terminology.= >> This has happened before as well with other commits. I'm sure everyone= >> is good-intentioned as well. >> >> There's not 1 person on D1777 who has 'accepted' it. That is what >> warrants a 'Reviewed by' to me. >> >> It's clear to me, but seems unclear to others. I really think the >> reviewer list needs to be split up. Rather than using icons, use >> separate lists. Reviewers requested: accepted: commented: changes >> requested:. > I don't think it needs to be split up, that feels unnecessary, if > someone hasn't accepted it then they haven't review it period IMO. Yes I too think it's obvious, yet I've seen at least 2 commits where the reviewed by line was essentially a lie. It's in SVN forever now with those names stamped as reviewers. --=20 Regards, Bryan Drewery --71KaNec92cajp8T0dhVfr0IlJNwmc4jqa Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJU36k4AAoJEDXXcbtuRpfPrisIALypNR5Xg4JeqeVwkRtogT/I p+gD7vk/HUNA5hg/wrin8nRB4pIKnikASihy5SnD99Wf5aS8a+Xl+rVbpyIrWtNY xrTswaA5i6TF6/Um0rJN0D5RNnL95W/33t5IcqsBBFb4peYRipqh+q9/YO7xV76N T9bAHHMsMWdoe818LKD8rdEjIbNh02m/xhrjp1BQ3dZ+bWYDKMG/PI9kRGKc1owH LMZQfsl8U0F5yQOfnVAn06kWELcqQqMhggzZGdh+4UwXLpXFndswrLgJHef8YO+d dbm8Ni++GQ/vg2GfiPjw/DmTRDmIl/i6MB8MiErbW824v93d2vBAjgT3qY6pCjo= =JhPT -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --71KaNec92cajp8T0dhVfr0IlJNwmc4jqa--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?54DFA938.6020207>