Buildroot Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Thomas De Schampheleire <patrickdepinguin@gmail.com>
To: buildroot@busybox.net
Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 4 of 8] manual: contributing: move section on patch reviews up and change intro
Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2014 17:24:30 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <a96a7201cce3dcfda3d5.1394036670@argentina> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <patchbomb.1394036666@argentina>

This patch moves the section about patch reviews and the
Tested-by/Reviewed-by/Acked-by tags upwards. Additionally, the first
paragraph is removed and replaced by another one. There are no other changes
in the text.

Signed-off-by: Thomas De Schampheleire <thomas.de.schampheleire@gmail.com>

---
 docs/manual/contribute.txt |  127 ++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
 1 files changed, 65 insertions(+), 62 deletions(-)

diff --git a/docs/manual/contribute.txt b/docs/manual/contribute.txt
--- a/docs/manual/contribute.txt
+++ b/docs/manual/contribute.txt
@@ -75,6 +75,71 @@ basically two things that can be done:
 Fixes http://autobuild.buildroot.org/results/51000a9d4656afe9e0ea6f07b9f8ed374c2e4069
 ---------------------
 
+Reviewing and testing patches
+-----------------------------
+
+With the amount of patches sent to the mailing list each day, the
+maintainer has a very hard job in judging which patches are ready to
+apply and which aren't. Contributors can greatly help here by reviewing
+and testing these patches, and providing the appropriate Tested-by,
+Reviewed-by, or Acked-by tags (see below).
+
+In the review process, do not hesitate to respond to patch submissions
+for remarks, suggestions or anything that will help everyone to
+understand the patches and make them better. Please use internet
+style replies in plain text emails when responding to patch
+submissions.
+
+Some tags are used to help following the state of any patch posted on
+the mailing-list:
+
+Tested-by:: Indicates that the patch has been tested in one way or
+  another. You are encouraged to specify what kind of testing you
+  performed (compile-test on architecture X and Y, runtime test on
+  target A, ...). This additional information helps other testers and
+  the maintainer.
+
+Reviewed-by:: Indicates that you code-reviewed the patch and did your
+  best in spotting problems, but you are not sufficiently familiar with
+  the area touched to provide an Acked-by tag. This means that there
+  may be remaining problems in the patch that would be spotted by
+  someone with more experience in that area. Should such problems be
+  detected, your Reviewed-by tag remains appropriate and you cannot
+  be blamed.
+
+Acked-by:: Indicates that you code-reviewed the patch and you are
+familiar enough with the area touched to feel that the patch can be
+committed as-is (no additional changes required). In case it later turns
+out that something is wrong with the patch, your Acked-by could be
+considered inappropriate. The difference between Acked-by and
+Reviewed-by is thus mainly that you are prepared to take the blame on
+Acked patches, but not on Reviewed ones.
+
+If you reviewed a patch and have comments on it, you should simply reply
+to the patch stating these comments, without providing a Reviewed-by or
+Acked-by tag. These tags should only be provided if you judge the patch
+to be good as it is.
+
+It is important to note that neither Reviewed-by nor Acked-by imply
+that testing has been performed. To indicate that you both reviewed and
+tested the patch, provide two separate tags (Reviewed/Acked-by and
+Tested-by).
+
+Note also that _any developer_ can provide Tested/Reviewed/Acked-by
+tags, without exception, and we encourage everyone to do this. Buildroot
+does not have a defined group of _core_ developers, it just so happens
+that some developers are more active than others. The maintainer will
+value tags according to the track record of their submitter. Tags
+provided by a regular contributor will naturally be trusted more than
+tags provided by a newcomer. As you provide tags more regularly, your
+'trustworthiness' (in the eyes of the maintainer) will go up, but _any_
+tag provided is valuable.
+
+Buildroot's Patchwork website can be used to pull in patches for testing
+purposes. Please see xref:apply-patches-patchwork[] for more
+information on using Buildroot's Patchwork website to apply patches.
+
+
 [[submitting-patches]]
 Submitting patches
 ------------------
@@ -190,68 +255,6 @@ This can be easily handled with +git for
     -M -o outgoing origin/master
 ---------------------
 
-Reviewing/Testing patches
--------------------------
-
-The review process for new patches is done over the mailing list. Once
-a patch is submitted to the mailing list, other developers will provide
-feedback to the patch via emails sent through the mailing list.
-
-In the review process, do not hesitate to respond to patch submissions
-for remarks, suggestions or anything that will help everyone to
-understand the patches and make them better. Please use internet
-style replies in plain text emails when responding to patch
-submissions.
-
-Some tags are used to help following the state of any patch posted on
-the mailing-list:
-
-Tested-by:: Indicates that the patch has been tested in one way or
-  another. You are encouraged to specify what kind of testing you
-  performed (compile-test on architecture X and Y, runtime test on
-  target A, ...). This additional information helps other testers and
-  the maintainer.
-
-Reviewed-by:: Indicates that you code-reviewed the patch and did your
-  best in spotting problems, but you are not sufficiently familiar with
-  the area touched to provide an Acked-by tag. This means that there
-  may be remaining problems in the patch that would be spotted by
-  someone with more experience in that area. Should such problems be
-  detected, your Reviewed-by tag remains appropriate and you cannot
-  be blamed.
-
-Acked-by:: Indicates that you code-reviewed the patch and you are
-familiar enough with the area touched to feel that the patch can be
-committed as-is (no additional changes required). In case it later turns
-out that something is wrong with the patch, your Acked-by could be
-considered inappropriate. The difference between Acked-by and
-Reviewed-by is thus mainly that you are prepared to take the blame on
-Acked patches, but not on Reviewed ones.
-
-If you reviewed a patch and have comments on it, you should simply reply
-to the patch stating these comments, without providing a Reviewed-by or
-Acked-by tag. These tags should only be provided if you judge the patch
-to be good as it is.
-
-It is important to note that neither Reviewed-by nor Acked-by imply
-that testing has been performed. To indicate that you both reviewed and
-tested the patch, provide two separate tags (Reviewed/Acked-by and
-Tested-by).
-
-Note also that _any developer_ can provide Tested/Reviewed/Acked-by
-tags, without exception, and we encourage everyone to do this. Buildroot
-does not have a defined group of _core_ developers, it just so happens
-that some developers are more active than others. The maintainer will
-value tags according to the track record of their submitter. Tags
-provided by a regular contributor will naturally be trusted more than
-tags provided by a newcomer. As you provide tags more regularly, your
-'trustworthiness' (in the eyes of the maintainer) will go up, but _any_
-tag provided is valuable.
-
-Buildroot's Patchwork website can be used to pull in patches for testing
-purposes. Please see xref:apply-patches-patchwork[] for more
-information on using Buildroot's Patchwork website to apply patches.
-
 [[reporting-bugs]]
 Reporting issues/bugs, get help
 -------------------------------

  parent reply	other threads:[~2014-03-05 16:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-03-05 16:24 [Buildroot] [PATCH 0 of 8] manual: rework Contributing chapter Thomas De Schampheleire
2014-03-05 16:24 ` [Buildroot] [PATCH 1 of 8] manual: contributing: expand introduction Thomas De Schampheleire
2014-03-05 17:11   ` Yann E. MORIN
2014-03-05 20:50     ` Samuel Martin
2014-03-05 16:24 ` [Buildroot] [PATCH 2 of 8] manual: contributing: add section on analyzing bug reports Thomas De Schampheleire
2014-03-05 17:37   ` Yann E. MORIN
2014-03-05 20:51     ` Samuel Martin
2014-03-05 16:24 ` [Buildroot] [PATCH 3 of 8] manual: contributing: move and expand autobuild section Thomas De Schampheleire
2014-03-05 17:48   ` Yann E. MORIN
2014-03-05 16:24 ` Thomas De Schampheleire [this message]
2014-03-05 17:41   ` [Buildroot] [PATCH 4 of 8] manual: contributing: move section on patch reviews up and change intro Yann E. MORIN
2014-03-05 20:57     ` Samuel Martin
2014-03-06  6:33   ` Arnout Vandecappelle
2014-03-05 16:24 ` [Buildroot] [PATCH 5 of 8] manual: contributing: add section on TODO list Thomas De Schampheleire
2014-03-05 17:17   ` Yann E. MORIN
2014-03-05 16:24 ` [Buildroot] [PATCH 6 of 8] manual: contributing: minor rewording of 'submitting patches' section Thomas De Schampheleire
2014-03-05 17:26   ` Yann E. MORIN
2014-03-06  6:39     ` Arnout Vandecappelle
2014-03-05 17:29   ` Yann E. MORIN
2014-03-05 20:59     ` Samuel Martin
2014-03-05 16:24 ` [Buildroot] [PATCH 7 of 8] manual: contributing: don't recommend leaving out changelog from patches Thomas De Schampheleire
2014-03-05 17:22   ` Yann E. MORIN
2014-03-05 16:24 ` [Buildroot] [PATCH 8 of 8] manual: contributing: minor rewording of 'reporting bugs' section Thomas De Schampheleire
2014-03-05 17:45   ` Yann E. MORIN
2014-03-05 21:05   ` Samuel Martin
2014-03-06  8:55     ` Thomas De Schampheleire
2014-03-06  9:21       ` Samuel Martin
2014-03-05 18:45 ` [Buildroot] [PATCH 0 of 8] manual: rework Contributing chapter Thomas Petazzoni

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=a96a7201cce3dcfda3d5.1394036670@argentina \
    --to=patrickdepinguin@gmail.com \
    --cc=buildroot@busybox.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox