ngraham added a comment.
In D16579#428807 <https://phabricator.kde.org/D16579#428807>, @smithjd wrote: > In D16579#428790 <https://phabricator.kde.org/D16579#428790>, @ngraham wrote: > > > Two reviewers had open "Changes Requested" statuses on this patch when you committed it, and from the latest comments, it's not clear that their concerns were addressed first. Can you explain your thought process regarding why you felt it was appropriate to ignore your reviewers as well as KDE community norms and commit this anyway? > > > The scope has shrunk to just the test files since D18826 <https://phabricator.kde.org/D18826> made the original code changes and the requested changes obsolete, and the test file changes were ack'ed. If that's the case, you should have asked the reviewers who had requested changes whether the current state of the patch was merge-able so they they could turn their Changes Requested statuses into Accepted statuses. We have a review process for a reason, and you are expected to follow the rules. REPOSITORY R286 KFileMetaData REVISION DETAIL https://phabricator.kde.org/D16579 To: smithjd, astippich, bruns, mgallien Cc: ngraham, bruns, astippich, kde-frameworks-devel, #baloo, gennad, domson, ashaposhnikov, michaelh, spoorun, abrahams
