Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2015 13:09:06 -0700 From: Ian Lepore <ian@freebsd.org> To: Bryan Drewery <bdrewery@FreeBSD.org> Cc: src-committers@freebsd.org, Steven Hartland <steven@multiplay.co.uk>, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, phabric-admin@FreeBSD.org, Randall Stewart <rrs@FreeBSD.org>, "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bz@FreeBSD.org>, svn-src-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Phabricator + 'Reviewed by' [was Re: svn commit: r278472 - in head/sys: netinet netinet6] Message-ID: <1423944546.80968.151.camel@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <54DFA938.6020207@FreeBSD.org> References: <201502091928.t19JSC5P066293@svn.freebsd.org> <38B8D2D0-862A-4DF5-9479-8EC234CF830B@FreeBSD.org> <54DE8F32.2090500@FreeBSD.org> <54DF6709.6030204@freebsd.org> <54DFA938.6020207@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
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
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1423944546.80968.151.camel>