svn commit: r521892 - in head/math: . R-cran-alabama

[Devin Teske]

> On Jan 3, 2020, at 11:17, Pedro Giffuni <pfg at FreeBSD.org> wrote:
> 
> 
> On 03/01/2020 13:01, Devin Teske wrote:
>> 
>>> On Jan 3, 2020, at 06:50, Adriaan de Groot <adridg at freebsd.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>> On Friday, 3 January 2020 09:36:28 CET Mathieu Arnold wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Jan 03, 2020 at 12:56:48AM +0000, Devin Teske wrote:
>>>>> Author: dteske (src committer)
>>>> As stated by this ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ you are not a ports committer.  So you
>>>> are required to get approval, and state the approval in your commits,
>>>> saying it has been reviewed is not enough.
>>>> 
>>>>>  Reviewed by:	mat, imp (previous revision)
>>>>>  Differential Revision:	https://reviews.freebsd.org/D22675
>>> Question for mat@, just to be clear: the issue here is (only) that there
>>> should be an extra line in the commit message,
>>> 	Approved by: mat
>>> or possibly
>>> 	Approved by: mat (mentor)
>>> as described in the committer's guide [1].
>>> 
>>> The Phab review was approved (accepted), so it's just the documentation of
>>> process?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> [1] https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/committers-guide/
>>> commit-log-message.html
>>> 
>> The process is broken currently as I’ve been denied a ports commit bit and my mentorship is null and void for a ports bit.
>> 
>> I do not not know how to navigate such a situation.
>> 
>> In this case, would review be akin to approval and thus, whomsoever reviewed it that is an active ports committer is therefore the approver?
> 
> Active committers can commit to other parts of the tree if they get approval from other active committers in that branch. It works both ways: src committers can (exceptionally) do ports or doc commits, and the other way around. However, a phabricator review is not an approval unless it is explicit.
> 
> Just my $0.02,
> 

What explicitly constitutes apprroval then?
— 
Devin