This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
Hi! By the way, I suggest that the patch review workflow is kept in sync as much as possible between all projects using the <http://patchwork.sourceware.org/> instance, so that we don't have to remember too many deviations. Does Siddhesh's proposal (quoted below) as well as <https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/Patch%20Review%20Workflow> generally make sense for GDB, too? On Tue, 27 May 2014 08:49:04 +0200, I wrote: > On Mon, 26 May 2014 15:33:58 +0530, Siddhesh Poyarekar <siddhesh.poyarekar@gmail.com> wrote: > > I > > have proposed a new state of 'Committed' that reflects that the patch > > has been committed to git, a state different from being accepted by a > > reviewer. > > Makes sense, as the action of committing may be the submitter's, > reviewer's, or someone else's. > > > I have also marked some states in green - those are states that should > > effectively close the patch. I just found out that I can mark states > > as 'Need Action' and figured that all states except those marked in > > green could be marked as such in patchwork. > > > > So in summary, the proposals are: > > > > 1. Add a new 'Committed' state > > 2. Mark the 'Accepted' as 'Needs Action' so that it shows up in the > > pending patches list. > > Sounds good to me. GrÃÃe, Thomas
Attachment:
pgpx9Y0SaMR0y.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |