On Sat, 2015-02-14 at 13:59 -0600, Bryan Drewery wrote: > On 2/14/2015 9:17 AM, Steven Hartland wrote: > > > > 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. >
You make that sound like some sort of huge crisis, but we have glitches in commit messages (occasionally even a missing/empty message) from time to time, and life goes on. Phabricator is supposed to be a tool to make our lives better and easier, but it could all too easily turn into a stick to hit people with, and the first step on that path is making a bunch of rigid formal rules and procedures. -- Ian _______________________________________________ svn-src-head@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-head-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
