From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id UFhCM8TmMmM2zgAAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 27 Sep 2022 08:04:20 -0400 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id CE9301E112; Tue, 27 Sep 2022 08:04:20 -0400 (EDT) Authentication-Results: simark.ca; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; secure) header.d=sourceware.org header.i=@sourceware.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=Me3ibGvz; dkim-atps=neutral X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Received: from sourceware.org (server2.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 87A511E0D3 for ; Tue, 27 Sep 2022 08:04:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1976D385829D for ; Tue, 27 Sep 2022 12:04:20 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 1976D385829D DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1664280260; bh=nSaahjOnzkJlQDMZtp+BMudUhilU51OVTGwzx8oSt+E=; h=Date:Subject:To:References:In-Reply-To:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To: From; b=Me3ibGvzrKdi/YYOVqQIrwDEjGty4Vawp0/j4JJ2kHB8kfzj1zq4L2r2FH4vLDOSf l6ZC75PyZXHwwpOK62SR+bMlSvA1cxS1m2KwIa7Sg66LxpRjD1BNpEGw6loDj0trG8 osTyGGG/UC0S1zYU2vXOVIlg48g+eRWuVkbOmB2o= Received: from simark.ca (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6909E3858C2D for ; Tue, 27 Sep 2022 12:03:54 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 6909E3858C2D Received: from [10.0.0.11] (unknown [217.28.27.60]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 26E291E0D3; Tue, 27 Sep 2022 08:03:54 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2022 08:03:53 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.3.0 Subject: Re: Proposal: Add review tags to patch review workflow. Content-Language: en-US To: Bruno Larsen , gdb@sourceware.org References: <453759b1-1ddf-1aff-a033-6183b84a4a4d@simark.ca> <08d732c8-2c5e-c9d6-5d37-7a740bf73255@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <08d732c8-2c5e-c9d6-5d37-7a740bf73255@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-BeenThere: gdb@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Simon Marchi via Gdb Reply-To: Simon Marchi Errors-To: gdb-bounces+public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb" On 2022-09-27 03:58, Bruno Larsen via Gdb wrote: > > On 26/09/2022 15:55, Simon Marchi wrote: >> >> On 2022-09-21 07:04, Bruno Larsen via Gdb wrote: >>> TL;DR: I want to introduce the usage of 3 new review tags to the GDB patch review workflow. They are: Reviewed-by, Approved-by and Tested-by. >> Hi Bruno, >> >> I completely agree with the proposal.  I really like the fact that it >> makes communication less ambiguous.  Following some process (or changing >> the process) can feel a bit heavy for long-timers, but I think it makes >> things much clearer for newcomers. >> >> Assuming we will go through with this proposal, it will need to be >> documented on the wiki so we can easily refer people to the procedure. >> Probably the ContributionChecklist page? >> >>    https://sourceware.org/gdb/wiki/ContributionChecklist >> >> Will you be able to take care of this when needed (do you have write >> access to the wiki)? > > Hi Simon, > > Thanks for the reply! I don't have write access to the wiki (In fact, I just created my account on it), can you give me the necessary permissions, or do I need to ask someone else? (in case it is the latter, who?) Done. Simon